- This topic has 7 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
I’m confused and don’t know the answer for these multiple choice questions.pl.help.
Which of the following is true of the written statement of employment particulars required by the Employment Rights Act 1996?
a If no separate contract of employment has been agreed, it is the contract of employment
b It must contain all the details of arrangements for sick pay
c It must include a note specifying any disciplinary rules and procedures that apply
d It may address pay by referring to the terms of a separate collective bargaining agreementwhich of the following is not a central factor in the statutory “unfair dismissal” cause of action?
a whether there was a dismissal
b whether there was a prima facie or potentially fair reason
c the reasonableness of the employer’s decision
d the fairness of the dismissal to the employeefor the first question ,the answer is c, why cant it be b and d?
and for the second question, its ok now , I understood now that the fairness of dismissal to the employee is not unfair dismissalFrom the Internet:
‘DO I HAVE TO HAVE A DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE?
The Employment Rights Act 1996 requires employers of 20 or more employees to include details of any relevant disciplinary rules in their written statements of employment particulars’
So answer C is true
But I can’t see why answer B is not also correct ???!!!
I don’t believe that answer D has much mileage in it
Yes, Sir. True.
The solution explains that D is not correct as it may not deal with pay by reference to other separate collective bargaining agreement.But, for c not to be correct is difficult to understand.The solution states that the details of arrangements for sick pay may b contained in another document….when the act clearly mentions terms and conditions relating to incapacity for work due to sickness including any provision for sick pay….
Agreed – but you need to reconcile yourself to the thought that the person that wrote this particular mcq is well up on employment law and (s)he’s probably correct
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.