Welcome to our April 2025 Employment Law Update!
This month’s update highlights key employment law changes, including the introduction of Neonatal Care Leave, increased compensation limits in Employment Tribunal Claims, updated Vento Bands for discrimination cases, and refreshed guidance on tackling modern slavery in supply chains. We also take a closer look at a recent tribunal ruling that underscores the importance of supporting employees with disabilities.
A reminder…
There were significant increases to wages and statutory rates from 6 April 2025, all of which we covered in our March update. Please visit our website for a reminder of those increases.
Neonatal Care Leave
The Neonatal Care (Leave and Pay) Act 2023 came into effect on 6 April 2025. All eligible parents are now entitled to up to a maximum of 12 weeks’ leave, as a day one right, to care for their baby if it was born after 5 April 2025 and requires a minimum of seven continuous days’ hospitalisation within 28 days of birth. Eligible parents with a minimum of 26 weeks’ continuous service are entitled to statutory paid leave up to a maximum of 12 weeks taken within 68 weeks of the baby’s birth, which is payable at either £187.18 per week or 90% of average weekly earnings, whichever is lower. Employers will not only need to be up to speed with the new legislation but also ensure they have implemented the same in practice and within their policies. Please contact a member of our team if you require more information on Neonatal Care Leave and help in drafting a policy suited to your business.
Vento Bands Increase
The “Vento Bands” are the guidelines that Employment Tribunals follow when assessing the appropriate level of financial compensation for ‘injury to feelings’ awards in cases of discrimination. There are three bands, all of which increased on 6 April 2025. These are as follows:
- Lower band: £1,200 to £12,100 (less serious cases, e.g., a one-off act of discrimination).
- Middle band: £12,100 to £36,400 (cases that do not merit an award in the upper band).
- Upper band: £36,400 to £60,700 (the most serious cases, e.g., following a lengthy campaign of discriminatory treatment).
In exceptionally serious cases, the upper band could exceed £60,700 and, as such, there is no “limit” on injury to feelings awards. It is worth noting that awards exceeding the upper band are infrequent.
It is for a tribunal to decide, firstly, which band a case should fall into and, secondly, where it should sit within each band (for example, a tribunal might award compensation in the middle level of the lower band, or the upper level of the middle band.)
Employment Tribunal Compensation Limits and Statutory Caps
In addition to the above, the Government also announced an increase to compensation limits and other statutory payments in Employment Tribunal Claims.
The increased rates came into force on 6 April 2025:
- Cap on a Statutory Week’s Pay (which is used for calculating statutory awards such as statutory redundancy pay and the basic award in unfair dismissal): £719
- Cap on Statutory Redundancy Pay: £21,570
- Maximum Basic Award for Unfair Dismissal (including for trade union reasons): £21,570
- Maximum Compensatory award for Unfair Dismissal: £118,223 (or 52 weeks’ gross pay, whichever is lower)
- Additional Award for Unfair Dismissal: £18,694 - £37,398 (this is based on 26 – 52 weeks’ pay subject to the statutory weekly cap of £719)
- Statutory Guarantee Pay (for lay-off and short-time working): £39 per day (subject to a maximum of 5 days or £195 in any 3-month period).
‘Transparency in Supply Chains’ statutory guidance
This guidance, designed to help businesses ensure that modern slavery is not taking place in either their business or their supply chain, was updated in March. It provides ‘practical advice to support businesses to undertake meaningful action to tackle modern slavery, incorporating the learnings from the past 10 years since the Act was introduced.’ You can access the guidance here.
Case update
Employer ignored employee’s disability in unfair dismissal case.
Kitching v University Hospitals Morecombe Bay NHS Trust Foundation
This case, in which the disabled claimant won her claim for unfair dismissal, is particularly relevant for employers given the current emphasis on helping those with disabilities to remain in the workforce and, indeed, to return to work.
Ms Kitching was employed as a cleaner by Morecombe Bay NHS Foundation Trust in 2018. The following year she recorded six periods of absence totalling 70 days, which were attributed to mental health difficulties (she had been diagnosed as bipolar and suffered from anxiety and depression) as well as injuries sustained from domestic abuse. During the next three years, she continued to have extended periods of sickness absence amounting to some 400 days. Two separate occupational health reports were prepared, the first of which classed her as disabled under the Equality Act 2010, whereas the second one did not.
Her pattern of absence eventually triggered the Trust’s absence policy’s system of warnings until she was eventually dismissed in 2023. At the tribunal, it was revealed that her line manager had not considered her disability, having relied upon the second occupational health report (and the evidence to the contrary), and thus had not applied the correct Absence Policy for managing her sickness absence. The tribunal upheld her claim on the grounds that the Trust had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability (including refusing her request to reduce her hours). The tribunal took the Trust to task for relying on the second occupational health report, which it described as ‘irrational’, and not taking note of the considerable amount of evidence about her disability contained in her sick notes.
Ms Kitching was awarded £49,147 for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal. This case serves as a useful reminder that employers cannot cherry-pick the information they choose to rely upon when managing disabled employees’ absences.
Please get in touch if you need help drafting a sickness absence policy or require advice on the sickness absence process.
The information provided in this article is provided for general information purposes only, and does not provide definitive advice. It does not amount to legal or other professional advice and so you should not rely on any information contained here as if it were such advice.
Wright Hassall does not accept any responsibility for any loss which may arise from reliance on any information published here. Definitive advice can only be given with full knowledge of all relevant facts. If you need such advice please contact a member of our professional staff.
The information published across our Knowledge Base is correct at the time of going to press.
