If you failed to note our interim newsflash, a week's pay (for the purposes of calculating Statutory redundancy pay and basic awards) was increased to £250 with effect from 1st February 2002, and the upper limit for an unfair dismissal award was also increased to £52,600.

Guarantee pay (which is paid when there is a contractual right or agreement to lay off and where the employer has no work for the employee to undertake and so requires the employee to stay at home on a normal working day) is increased to £17.00 per day (previously £16.70.)

The government has also agreed in principle to increases to the National Minimum Wage, which should take place from 1st October 2002. These are planned to be as follows:

• adult rate: rises from £4.10 per hour to £4.20 per hour,
• development rate: rises from £3.50 per hour to £3.60 per hour.

Draft regulations have now been produced by the government to implement the Fixed Term Workers Directive, and the 12 week consultation period is now under way. The directive aims to align the terms and conditions of employees on fixed-term contracts with those of permanent employees. Terms and conditions extend to training and being considered for permanent employment.

The initial draft excluded pay and pensions, but the Government now plans to include both of these within the scope of the regulations. The CBI is calling for the government to leave pensions out of the legislation and argues that the requirement to offer fixed-term workers the same pension provisions will lead to unnecessary administrative cost and nearly £100 million in extra pensions payments.

This could also backfire, as in order to treat people equally, businesses may decide to introduce qualifying periods for all employees, thereby reducing the number of people with an occupational pension. Currently, only 20% of company pension schemes have any qualifying period. The CBI believes that access to stakeholder pensions is the best route for fixed term workers, and that company pensions should be reserved to reward long-term loyalty.

The regulations also propose other rights:

• Workers who have been on fixed-term contracts for more than four years would have to be given a contract of indefinite duration at the next renewal. (Note that this four-year period will only commence once the Regulations come into force.)
• Workers on fixed-term contracts can demand a letter of explanation if they receive less favourable treatment.
• The ability to enter into waiver agreements to avoid redundancy payments will be abolished. Waiver clauses agreed before 10 July 2002 will remain in force.

A recent report by the TUC, "About Time", declares that the Working Time Directive, which aimed to limit working hours to an average of 48 per week, isn't working.

The report reveals that 4M employees work at least 48 hours each week (350,000 more than a decade ago) with managers and professional staff working the longest hours. It claims that one in 25 men work at least 60 hours per week. More than 10% of these "long hours workers" also fail to take any paid holiday.

The UK is the only country which allows staff to opt out of the 48 hour limit.

It seems that an overall reduction in paid overtime generally is starting to reduce the hours for those who receive this, but that managers and professional staff (who do not generally receive extra pay for additional hours) are still tied to their desks.

The directive is expected to be amended in 2003 and it may be that the UK loses its right to opt out. However, with the huge increase in cases of work-related stress, and with long hours being cited as the major factor responsible for over half of these, will it be stress that forces employers to consider their working practices and long-hours culture rather than legislation on working hours? Stress has now replaced the common cold as the major reason for ill-health related absence. The TUC took up 6428 cases of work-related stress in 2001, as opposed to 516 in 2000 - a 12 fold increase.

The government has launched a campaign to raise awareness of common misinterpretation of the current law on doctor's notes.

Apparently, many employers require their employees to supply proof that they were ill following every absence from work and demand the Med3 form for ailments as minor as headaches. Cabinet Office research has shown that around 2.4 million visits to GPs each year are for sick notes not required by law. This clearly wastes GP's time, and adds to the administration tasks.

For the purposes of SSP payments, only absences of more than seven days in a row (including weekends) need a doctor's certificate. A self-certification form is required for absences of more than 3 days.

Research has consistently shown that the standard and consistent use of "return to work" interviews with the immediate line manager on return from any sickness absence is the simplest and most effective way of reducing absence. The purpose of these meetings is both to demonstrate that the business does care and does notice the employee's absence, and also to highlight the effect of the absence on the smooth running of the business.

If you have no procedure in place, see our policy on absence and sick pay /docs/pol/absence/index.html and also our general guidance on handling absence /docs/legal/absence.html. The site also has a standard self-certification of absence form, /docs/lf/selfcert/index.html which can be used for all absences, including those ofup to seven days, and which provides a useful starting point for the return to work interview.

For more guidance or a review of your procedures, call our helpline.

If you've visited the website in the last couple of days, you will notice an entire new health and safety section! If you haven't seen this yet, do take a look and let us have your feedback. As with employment legislation, we've tried to make it jargon-free and easily accessible.

The steps you take to manage health and safety in your workforce will depend largely on the activities undertaken by your business and the industry sector in which you operate. Also, it's what actually happens, as opposed to what your paperwork may claim, which will count! If you have specific queries re health and safety, please call our helpline and we can quote you for on-site specialist consultancy or advice.

Research by the hotel group, Premier Lodges, showed that 42% of women who travel on business said that they were worried about their safety, and almost a third of those questioned admitted to having been in a threatening situation.

Employers should ensure that all employees (not just the women) who are sent out on business should be fully trained in respect of personal safety. Much of this is common sense, but systems should be put in place, ensuring that journeys are planned, that a contact person is on hand at all times in case of emergency, and that the line manager or nominated person always knows the whereabouts of the employee. Other steps taken by some employers including issuing mobile phones for protection, and drawing up lists of recommended hotels where other employees have felt safe.

All mobile equipment, such as fork lift trucks and tractors, made before 5 December 1998 must meet rigorous new safety requirements before the end of this year.

The changes (which already apply to new equipment) make it harder for such vehicles to roll over, and also make it harder for employees to fall from such vehicles or be hit by falling objects. Braking, visibility and unauthorised start up are also covered.

Measures that can be taken to bring existing equipment into line include the retrospective fitting of roll-over structures, seat restraints such as lap belts and seat belts, and visibility aids such as mirrors.

The four-year transitional period for bringing such equipment up to the new standards expires at the end of this year.

The HSE has revised its basic advice on first aid at work. This is available in both leafet and poster form, and the aim is to keep workers up to date with the latest guidelines from the Resuscitation Council.

The guidance will help first-aiders in minimising the consequence of injury until expert help can be obtained and covers such things as how to resuscitate someone, how to deal with severe bleeding, broken bones, burns and eye injuries as well as electric shock.

The advice can also be downloaded from: www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg347.pdf.

The nature of your business may make it imperative for any signs of alcohol or drug mis-use to be identified at an early stage in order to protect the business, its staff, customers and the public.

Alcohol or drug misuse can be categorised in two ways: Inappropriate behaviour: for example being rowdy after drinking at the pub at lunchtime, or discrediting the business after drinking excessively at a business lunch, seminar or training course. Such incidents would generally be dealt with as a disciplinary matter, as the member of staff basically would be irresponsible rather than drink-dependent.

Alcohol or drug dependency: An employee's performance, attendance, punctuality etc may be unsatisfactory as a consequence of a dependency upon drugs or alcohol, both of which are classified as illnesses. This will have obvious implications in terms of keeping within the law (some Tribunal decisions have placed a heavy burden on the employer in terms of supporting the employee's rehabilitation if dismissal is to be deemed fair).

The business should be clear in principle whether it wishes its policy and procedure to be orientated towards treating incidents concerning alcohol or drugs as disciplinary issues or health issues.

The legal position The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (HASAWA) requires the employer to provide a safe working environment. It also places a duty on employees to ensure the health and safety both of themselves, and others.

Therefore, in principle, your business can incorporate whatever requirements you consider necessary, given the nature of your business, into an Alcohol and Drugs Policy and Procedure.

It would be reasonable to assert that the employee must follow the requirements of your policy for you to discharge your duty under the HASAWA, even if the policy did not form part of the employee's terms and conditions of employment. This would be on the basis that the purpose of the policy was to ensure, and improve, the safety and health of the working environment.

However, if you decide to go further and introduce a requirement to undergo testing for drugs or alcohol, the policy must form part of the employees' terms and conditions of employment. You then have a contractual right to require the employee to undergo tests in whatever circumstances you specify in the policy and procedure. For employees in a Trade Union recognised by the employer, the policy and procedure can be incorporated into their terms and conditions of employment by collective agreement. This can be achieved by consulting with, and obtaining the agreement of, the Trade Union on behalf of its members. The remaining employees must give consent on an individual basis for the policy to be binding on them.

Obviously, there is no problem with screening as part of your selection process or incorporating the policy into the terms and condition of employment of new employees and this could be actioned immediately after the policy is approved.

Drafting a policy There are a number of issues for consideration prior to drafting a policy and procedure on alcohol and drugs. They include:

• Does the business take the view that dependency on drugs or alcohol is an illness, and, as such will management take a sympathetic stance in dealing with such issues or do you take the line that, due to the nature of your business, you simply cannot afford to tolerate such problems. Forexample, if staff are employed as drivers or operating dangerous machinery?
• To what extent do you feel there is,or potentially could be,an issue with drug or alcohol abuse?
• Dependent upon the answer to the above, do you wish to introduce screening taking into account the amount of management time in putting this in place, and the expense of implementation?
• Furthermore, will the benefits of screening outweigh the possible loss of goodwill from the workforce? Will staff view the initiative positively or feel their integrity is being insulted?

As with any policy, it needs to be seen to be reasonable and fair, and full consultation prior to implementation, together with proper communication will assist in its success.

The need to review existing policies Organisations who already have a drugs and alcohol policy in place may wish to re-evaluate this in the light of the potential decriminalisation of cannabis, and possibly to reconsider the severity of punishment for cannabis-related incidents. Workers in safety-critical industries will be unaffected, and in these situations, existing statute and case law will still allow the employer to take appropriate disciplinary action against an intoxicated worker. What is now unclear is whether a tribunal will find the summary dismissal of someone who has been found using cannabis in a non-safety critical area to be unfair.

The Human Rights Act gives employees the right to "enjoyment" of their private life and a recent tribunal (Wilson v David Lloyd Leisure Centres) found that Wilson was unfairly dismissed after having been caught smoking cannabis on the premises. Again, the need for policies to be clear, properly communicated and consistently applied is stressed.

Union recognition deals saw a large increase last year - up by 470. Probably as a direct result of the Employment Relations Act 1999, union recognition numbers in 2001 were three times that of 2000 and there were no instances of derecognition.

The laws surrounding statutory union recognition and the forthcoming legislation on workplace consultation may catch out the unwary employer. It is critical to create an effective partnership process to work with your employees: otherwise you run the risk of having an alternative, and possibly unpalatable, agreement imposed on you.

The TUC is currently campaigning to reduce the requirement for a 40% vote in favour from the entire bargaining unit to gain statutory recognition to a simple majority of those voting, and is also opposed to the exclusion of small businesses (those with fewer than 21 workers).

Amendments to the Employment Bill will allow lower paid fathers to benefit from paid paternity leave. Before the changes, fathers who earn below the Lower Earnings Limit for National Insurance - currently £72 per week - would not have been eligible for the paid leave.

The changes to the Income Support regulations will allow thousands of fathers to top up their existing wages to £130 per week for the two weeks' paternity leave.

Statutory paternity leave will be introduced in April 2003.

A recent report states that pay freezes are becoming more common, and that one in ten wage reviews over the last six months have recommended a freeze. Workers in the hotel and engineering sectors have been particularly badly hit by this.

The majority of pay rises this year to date have been between 2% and 3.5%.

A new "Guide to Data Protection Auditing" has been issued by the Information Commissioner's office.

This takes the employer through the full audit process, includes a beginner's guide to auditing for small businesses, and should enable employers to identify any weaknesses in their current procedures.

The guide is in both CD-Rom and online format and is available free of charge by phoning 01625 545700 or can also be accessed via www.dataprotection.gov.uk/dpaudit.