Something we hear a lot in our employment law (and, indeed, in most areas of litigation) is that, in any particular case, one party “won” and the other “lost”.
This concept – of winning and losing – implies a competition of merits or might in which one party triumphs over the other.
Many people who have been litigants to employment litigation, however, will tell you that even when winning a case they don’t necessarily feel like “winners”. Some are cynical enough to say that lawyers are the only true “winners” in any litigation (because, win or lose, they get paid).
You are currently browsing the monthly archive for November 2009.
Here is an excellent contribution from my colleague Maria Berryman – with relevance in advance of the holiday season.
Before the Christmas Cocktails take their toll on one’s clarity over the ensuing weeks, I thought I would attempt to provide some clarity on the requirements arising from that very clear piece of legislation known as our Holidays Act. This post focuses on just those four magic days that are treated differently to all other public holidays during the year being, Christmas Day, Boxing Day, New Year’s Day and January 2nd.
These days are treated differently because unlike the rest of the year’s public holidays, these days will be transferred to Mondays and Tuesdays (Mondayized link to Google def?) if they fall on the weekend. The aim of the Holidays Act in relation to these holidays is to ensure that employees (who are not truly casual employees, or called in only because it is a public holiday) enjoy four paid public holidays over the Christmas New Year period.
I spoke on Radio New Zealand recently about a phenomenon that is apparent in some workplaces – and which relates to the apparent tension between different generations (and their general approach to life and work).
This week there is an interesting post on the always–excellent HR Capitalist about the need for employers to manage different generations differently – or not (as the case may be). Kris Dunn offers some interesting thoughts which are well worth a read.
A follow up post on the topical issue of txting and driving.
Isn’t it interesting how many conversations have taken place in the last week – after the law changed to make it illegal to use a cell phone whilst driving (without a “hands free” kit).
This week the Wall Street Journal has a story about a poll in America – which suggested that 97% of Americans support the prohibition of txting while driving. The post also has a sobering tale about a woman who was killed when a car following was distracted by an incoming txt.
Some sage advice this week from an American law firm – be careful about “friending” your employees on Facebook.
Most of us are aware that, by accepting an invitation to become someone’s “friend” we are also accepting an invitation to view all of their posted material – sometimes including pictures and personal rants and raves.
Where the “friendship” is between boss and employee, however, there can often be unfortunate leaks of information – where the employee says something that they would rather that the boss did not hear. It seems the problem is that the employee quite often forgets they have friended their boss. Oh dear…
About the Blogger
Proudly supported by
