• Home
  • Our Services
  • Employment Tribunals
  • Employment Contracts
  • Disciplinary & Grievance
  • Attendance & Performance
  • Flexible Working
  • Latest News
  • Articles & Guides
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Employment Law Services
  • Employment Law Clinic
  • >
  • Contracts of Employment
  • >
  • “Employee Shareholders” Finally Approved

“Employee Shareholders” Law Agreed

After concessions that the Lords considered would result in the new employment law introducing an “employee shareholder” status more or less meaningless for all practical purposes, clause 27 of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill has tonight been agreed by the House of Lords.

The clause has been subject to significant amendments since its first draft, and would now place a wide variety of responsibilities on employers before this new employment status can be used.

Employers will have to:

• provide a cooling-off period, as any employment contract will be of no effect until seven days have passed from the date of the offer;

• potentially provide two written statements of particulars – the statement of particulars required under Section 1 of the Employment Rights Act, required within two months after the beginning of the employment. And a written statement of the particulars of the status of employee shareholder and of the rights which attach to the shares; and

• meet any reasonable [members of the House of Lords suggested this cost alone could be in the thousands] costs incurred by the individual in obtaining the advice which would otherwise be met by the individual (this cost will be payable whether or not the individual becomes an employee shareholder).

The clause will insert a new section into the Employment Rights Act – section 205A. Whether this section will ever see an employee working under its restrictive terms probably remains open to at least as much debate as this proposal has attracted. If any employee does contemplate a vacancy under these new terms, one thing is certain: employers will be taking a gamble to offer these new terms, conscious of the costs of legal fees just to get a job offer considered, with nothing binding until a potential employee has received legal advice & allowed a cooling-off period.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer has got his way, but with a status that comes so many strings, opponents of this proposal can safely feel the same way.

Filed under: Contracts of Employment, Flexible Working, General News, Laws & Regulations by Employment Law Clinic           Post created on: April 24th, 2013

« Opposition to Rights for Shares Increases in Lords
Working Time Regulations Leave John Lewis with £40 Million Bill »
  • Employment Law News Latest Entries

    • Most Glaringly Obvious Judgment Ever? S38 Employment Act 2002 Is Clearly A Duck!
    • Complicating Employment Laws Even More
    • Overtime Worked should be counted in average pay for holiday pay
    • UK has better than average days paid annual leave in the G20… and the EU #GE2017 #UKemplaw #BankHolidays
    • TUPE ELI is limited to s.1 Statement of Particulars, not whether payments are contractual/non-contractual
  • Employment Law News Archives

  • Categories



Testimonials | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Copyright © 2008-2021 Employment Law Clinic Ltd • Kemp House • 160 City Road • London • EC1V 2NX • 020 3397 2979