Employment Law and Practice
Assessment Brief
*
| Module Title: Employment Law and Practice |
| Module Code: 302LEG |
| Assessment Type: Coursework | Assessment Number: 1 | Study Mode: FT | Weighting: 40% |
| Submission Date: 19/03/2021 | Submission Time: 18:00 | Campus: CUC |
| Introduction: |
| Case study- Allows students to research on specific aspects of law, apply the same to a real life scenario and present their research in an academically acceptable format. |
| Completion of this assignment will address the following learning outcomes: | |
| 3 | Assess the law concerning wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal and redundancy and how this can be managed effectively. |
| 4 | Analyse critically the role of policy and procedure within employment dispute resolution. |
| 5 | Evaluate the rules that govern discrimination and summarise the development through statutory law and apply to given scenarios. |
| Task: |
| Read the case study of Peach and Pearl Ltd (PPL) as attached. Advice (PPL) on the law relating to the said proposals for redundancies. Your advise should include suggestions on how (PPL) may best manage the situation with a view to avoiding or minimising legal actions being taken against them. You must highlight difficulties with some of the proposals suggested by Tyler Pratt (citing relevant cases and statutes). Your work should demonstrate “the best practice” for identifying which employees should be selected for redundancy and include a calculation for the redundancy payment each selected employee will receive. You should give a detailed explanation, for choosing each employee for redundancy (if any) SEE ANNEX 1 |
Guidance notes and considerations
Late Submission
If you are not able to complete your coursework on time due to extenuating circumstances, the ONLY way to receive an extension (up to 5 working days) or a deferral (anything longer than 5 working days) is to contact a Registry team member located at your specific CU site.
* Extenuating circumstances are defined by CU as ‘genuine circumstances beyond your control or ability to foresee, and which seriously impair your assessed work’.
* Please note that you will need to provide third party evidence to support your reasoning for requiring an extension or deferral.
- To accommodate any last minute technical difficulties or changes to personal circumstances, the University will automatically accept any submissions made up to 24 hours after the deadline without penalty. There is no need to complete an extension request form if you submit within this timeframe.
- You may submit draft assessments up to the deadline to receive an originality report from Turn It In, however the most recent submission will be accepted as final once the deadline has passed.
* Your course tutor is NOT able to approve an extension or a deferral, if you have not completed the official forms and had your request approved your work will count as not submitted and receive a zero mark.
Plagiarism and Malpractice
* You are encouraged to check the originality of your work by using the draft Turnitin links on AULA, our new Learning Experience Platform (LXP).
* Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the academic conduct panel. This applies to all coursework and exam answers.
* A marked difference between your writing style, knowledge and skill level demonstrated in class discussion, any test conditions and that demonstrated in a coursework assignment may result in you having to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assignment is entirely your own work.
* If you make use of the services of a proof reader in your work you must keep your original version and make it available as a demonstration of your written efforts.
* You must not submit work for assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full), either for your current course or for another qualification of this university, unless this is specifically provided for in your assignment brief or specific course or module information.
Where earlier work by you is citable, ie. it has already been published/submitted, you must reference it clearly. Identical pieces of work submitted concurrently will also be considered to be self-plagiarism.
Submission Guidelines
There should be a title page which clearly identifies the following;
* Name of the module * Title of the Assessment
* Assessment number * Word count
The word count identified includes quotations, but excludes the bibliography and unless specifically stated, encompasses a discrepancy of + or – 10%.
| Banding | Knowledge and Understanding (30%) | Analysis, Interpretation and Application of Theory (30%) | Quality of Research (20%) | Academic Writing (20%) |
| 90-100% | Exceptional knowledge base exploring and analysing the discipline and its theory with extraordinary originality and autonomy. | Makes exceptional use of a range of relevant techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Demonstrates an exceptional theoretical understanding, where relevant, with appropriately selected theoretical knowledge integrated into the overall assignment tasks and all learning outcomes. | Exceptional exploration of wider academic sources with a high degree of independent learning which exceeds the assignment brief. Sources have been accurately interpreted and integrated with flawless synthesis and evaluation leading to innovative and interesting ideas. | Exceptional answer with coherent and logical presentation of ideas. The answer is clearly expressed with flair and originality. No language errors present and academic writing style was adhered to throughout. OSCOLA referencing has been employed in an accurate manner. |
| 80-89% | Outstanding knowledge base exploring and analysing the discipline and its theory with clear originality and autonomy. | Makes outstanding use of a range of relevant techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Shows a well-developed ability to compare alternative theories and apply them within the context of the assignment task and all learning outcomes, where relevant. | Outstanding exploration of wider academic sources with a high degree of independent learning which exceeds the assignment brief. Sources have been accurately interpreted and integrated with a high degree of analysis and application, leading to innovative and interesting ideas. | Outstanding answer with coherent and logical presentation of ideas. The answer is clearly expressed with originality. No language errors present and academic writing style was adhered to. OSCOLA referencing has been employed in an accurate manner. |
| 70-79% | Excellent knowledge base that supports analysis and/or interpretation and problem-solving in theory and/or practice within the discipline, with considerable originality. | Makes excellent use of established techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Shows a systematic and accurate understanding of key theories, which are consistently and appropriately applied within the context of the assignment task and all learning outcomes, where relevant. | Excellent exploration of wider academic sources with evidence of independent learning which may exceed the assignment brief. Sources have been accurately interpreted, integrated and analysed, with an attempt made at synthesis leading to interesting ideas. | Excellent answer with coherent and logical presentation of ideas. The answer is entirely relevant and focused. Minimal language errors which have no impact on clarity of expression. Academic writing style was adhered to. Referencing in OSCOLA has been employed in an accurate manner. |
| 60-69% | Very good knowledge base that supports analysis and/or interpretation and problem-solving in theory and/or practice within the discipline, with some originality displayed. | Makes very good use of established techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Shows an accurate understanding of key theories, where relevant, which are appropriately applied within the context of the assignment task and the module learning outcomes. | Very good evidence of wider academic reading which indicates an approach to independent learning. Sources have been accurately interpreted and integrated with some attempt at analysis. | Very good answer with coherent and logical presentation of ideas. The answer is largely relevant and focused. Some language errors may be present but do not impact on the clarity of expression. Academic writing style was inconsistently adhered to. Referencing in OSCOLA is mostly accurate with some minor errors. |
| 50-59% | Good knowledge base that supports some analysis and/or interpretation and problem-solving in theory and/or practice within the discipline. | Makes good use of established techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Sound descriptive knowledge of key theories, where relevant, with some appropriate application. | Good evidence of academic reading, with some attempt at moving beyond the recommended texts. Interpretation of sources has been largely accurate, but there may be some instances of misunderstanding. Limited evidence of integration and analysis. | Good answer with some attempt at coherent and logical presentation. The answer contains some irrelevant material and lacks focus at points. Some language errors are present which impacts on clarity at times. Academic writing style is not adhered to at all times. Referencing in OSCOLA is present, however may not be entirely accurate at times. |
| 40-49% | Satisfactory knowledge base demonstrating comprehension and formulation of basic knowledge with some omissions at the level of theoretical understanding. Limited ability to discuss theory and solve problems within the discipline. | Makes satisfactory but limited use of established techniques of interpretation, application and/or analysis, where relevant to the module learning outcomes. Selection of theory, where relevant, is satisfactory but application and/or understanding is limited. | Satisfactory evidence of academic reading, with no obvious attempt to move beyond the recommended texts. Interpretation of sources may be inaccurate and poorly integrated. Analysis is unlikely to have been attempted. | Satisfactory answer, however, issues with coherence and logical presentation are likely to be present. The answer contains irrelevant material and lacks focus. Language errors are frequent which impacts on clarity and academic writing style is not present. Referencing in OSCOLA may be incomplete and is inaccurate. |
| 35-39% (Marginal Fail) | Outcomes not or only partially met. Restricted knowledge base demonstrated. Limited understanding of discipline. Difficulty with linking theory and problem solving within the discipline. | Attempts at analysis, where relevant, and interpretation are ineffective and/or uninformed by the discipline. Knowledge of theory, where relevant, is inaccurate and/or incomplete. Choice of theory inappropriate. Application and/or understanding demonstrated is very limited. | Limited evidence of reading at an academic level. Sources used may be inappropriate and interpreted poorly. No evidence of integration, analysis or interpretation. Poor academic practice may have resulted in sections of plagiarised material. | Answer is attempted but limited. Poor coherence and illogical presentation. The answer contains irrelevant material and lacks focus throughout. Language errors are consistent and impact on the clarity of expression. Academic writing style is not present. Referencing in OSCOLA is incomplete and inaccurate. |
| 0 – 34% | Little or no evidence of knowledge base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline. Significant difficulty with theory and problem solving within the discipline. | Absence of relevant theoretical content and/or use of theory, where relevant. Lacks any analysis and interpretation. | Inadequate evidence of reading at an academic level with poor application of sources and ideas. Answer is likely to include inappropriate references which are misunderstood and not integrated. Possibility of plagiarism OR no evidence of academic research. Answer may not be research based. | Serious and fundamental flaws leading to an unclear answer. Very weak academic skills and writing ability. Poorly structured with multiple language errors. Inadequate application of OSCOLA referencing style. |
ANNEX 1:
302LEG ASSIGNMENT 1 – CASE STUDY
Peach and Pearl Ltd (PPL) manufacture washing machines across EU. PPL are experiencing a downturn in sales of their products and currently has a workforce of 20.
Mr Tyler Pratt is (CEO of PPL) and has inherited the business from his father, who was a philanthropist. Tyler Pratt is currently divorced and has two children, who are of school age. Mr Pratt believes that women should be homemakers and therefore does not think it is right for women to seek any employment, when children are of schooling age.
Mr Pratt views his workforce as lazy and is bent on increasing productivity and profit. He is a straight talking, ruthless and energetic person. What Mr Pratt lacks in creativity, is masked in his bullish attitude towards others. Mr Pratt refers to himself as a businessman, but history shows that he has had two failed businesses.
Attached and Marked as Document 1 is a chart of the composition of all employees at PPL.
You have been instructed by Mr Pratt to help in the restructuring of PPL. As a hands on person, Mr Pratt suggests the following:-
- Appoint himself as Electrical Engineer (albeit he has no formal experience)
- The work force is reduced to 10
- PPL make all disabled employees redundant
- Employ men only
You have concerns about Mr Pratt’s proposals and genuine fears about the viability of PPL.
(DOCUMENT 1)
Total numbers of employees
20 staff broken down as follows:
| Roles | Number of staff |
| Electronic Engineers | 6 |
| Mechanical Engineers | 6 |
| Junior Engineers | 2 |
| Junior Researcher | 2 |
| Administration | 4 |
| Totals | 20 |
Employees’ ages
| Employees’ age range | Number of employees |
| Under 18 | 0 |
| 18-21 | 2 |
| 22-29 | 2 |
| 30-49 | 12 |
| 50-59 | 4 |
| 60 and above | 0 |
These are distributed proportionately across all 3 sites in the group and in various roles.
Service
| Length of service | Number of employees |
| Under 2 years | 5 |
| 2-12 years | 7 |
| Over 12 years | 8 |
Protected Characteristics
The break down between male and female employees across the whole group is as follows:
| Job/ Title | No of male employees | No of female employees |
| Electrical Engineers | 3 | 3 |
| Mechanical Engineers | 2 | 4 |
| Junior Engineers | 1 | 1 |
| Junior Researcher | 1 | 1 |
| Administration | 0 | 4 |
Schedule of Pay
| Names | Length of Service and Age ( ) | Pay | Sex | Role |
| Mrs F | 12 (30) | £30,000/pa | Female (P/T) | Electrical Engineer |
| Mrs D | 12 (33) | £40,000/pa | Female (FT) | Electrical Engineer |
| Mrs X | 12 (31) | £41,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Electrical Engineer |
| Mr A | 10 (48) | £56,000 p/a | Male (FT) | Electrical Engineer |
| Mr L | 10 (42) | £56,000 p/a | Male (FT) | Electrical Engineer |
| Mr Pratt | 2 (52) | £87,000 p/a | Male (FT) | CEO / Electrical Engineer |
| Mrs M | 2 (34) | £40,000 p/a | Female ((FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mrs K | 2 (36) | £40,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mrs T | 9 (38) | £33,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mrs O | 8 (39) | £32,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mr B | 14 (48) | £60,000 p/a | Male (FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mr C | 16 (55) | £60,000 p/a | Male (FT) | Mechanical Engineer |
| Mr Q | 2 (38) | £20,000 p/a | Male (FT) | Junior Engineer |
| Mrs V | 2 (39) | £17,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Junior Engineer |
| Mr P | 2 (29 | £12,000 p/a | Male (PT) | Junior Researcher |
| Mrs W | 7 (29) | £12,000 p/a | Female (PT) | Junior Researcher |
| Mrs Hunter | 12 (55) | £15,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Administrator |
| Mrs Farmer | 4 (21) | £9,000 p/a | Female (PT) | Administrator |
| Mrs Eden | 12 (50) | £15,000 p/a | Female (FT) | Administrator |
| Mrs Rees | 4 (21) | £9,000 p/a | Female (PT) | Administrator |
For all purposes remember that redundancy payments are capped in years.
Also assume that each employee has not had an increase in pay for the duration of their employment i.e. Mr C has been employed for 16 years and has not received any pay increase.
Maximum weekly pay should be limited to the current rate.
Mrs X, Mrs D, Mrs T, Mr P, Mrs V and Mr C are all registered as disabled.
