In Barbulescu v Romania, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that an  employer was not permitted to terminate an employee’s contract for cause for  sending (prohibited) private messages on a work system.   Based on your knowledge of international employment law, to what extent do you  agree or disagree with the above decision? Consider critically the ruling of the ECHR  in the above (Barbulescu’s) case and compare the position of the law in the UK with  the law in your own country.                    

EMPLOYMENT LAW

Learning Outcomes:

1)  1a. Explain the core principles that underpin employment law as it applies in the UK.  1b.  Critically consider the likely future progress of employment law in the light of its past  development; 1c. Evaluate the formation, operation and termination of employment  contracts in a variety of situations.

2) 2a. Apply your knowledge of employment law to solve practical problems and scenarios  and advise colleagues as to the implications of legal developments, appropriate action and  organizational response. 2b. Carry out in depth legal research on issues relevant to  employment law.

3) 3a Present your work to an acceptable academic standard in writing; 3b. Write  appropriately for a variety of different target groups.

Question 1 compulsory (70 Marks):  
“Concern over the potential unravelling of our existing framework of employment  rights largely revolves around the importance of establishing ‘a floor of rights’ and  setting minimum standards in ensuring a robust contract of employment, degree of  workplace equity, protecting the most vulnerable, and challenging the reliance of  the UK economy on low paid and low skilled work”     Dr. Prior – Plymouth University

Discuss critically within the context of the roles and regulation of Employment Law in  the UK. Support your answer where necessary with relevant academic authorities,  case law, legislation, and opinions of jurists.

Choose one question (question 2 OR 3)

Question 2 (30 Marks):
Jemima started a job at EasyKlean, a chain of dry cleaners, four weeks ago. She  works in a small shop and does not do the dry cleaning herself (although this is done
on the premises). She works behind the till, taking the clothes from the customers  and handing out tickets. She has just found out that she is pregnant, something that
she did not know about when she started work. Her doctor says that it would not be  good for her health or her pregnancy if she continued in her current role as the
fumes from the dry-cleaning fluid could have a bad effect. When she tells her  manager of the pregnancy, he gets angry and says that if he had known that she  was pregnant he would not have given her a job.
a. What obligations does EasyKlean have in these circumstances?
b. What rights and remedies are available to Jemima?

Question 3 (30 Marks):
In Barbulescu v Romania, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that an  employer was not permitted to terminate an employee’s contract for cause for  sending (prohibited) private messages on a work system.

Based on your knowledge of international employment law, to what extent do you  agree or disagree with the above decision? Consider critically the ruling of the ECHR  in the above (Barbulescu’s) case and compare the position of the law in the UK with  the law in your own country.