What THEY think they can get is what’s important!
This article is all about perception, how T&C’s can really help businesses warn off chancers and how a good set will dovetail with insurance.
Welcome back, or if you’re new here sign up to our RSS feed to receive insurance tips, new posts, plus details of events and promotions that could help you or your network reduce the risks facing their organisation.
Treating customers fairly?
Derek had been a client for some years when he called and advised “I’ve received a rather worrying letter from a temp I placed”. It appeared their placement wasn’t going to be renewed and they wanted Derek to pay them for not having any work. Although the company that had employed them told the temp it was because “someone else had returned to work”, they told Derek “off the record, they were rude and argumentative”.
Derek was concerned that the relatively new “AWR” regulations had given the temp the feeling that they could gain compensation. We were aware of changes in regulations before they came into place, Derek and I had discussed the implications and he agreed to put protection for the business in place when they came into reality.
A legal eagle will correct me here if I’m wrong
The regulations give temporary workers the same rights as permanent employees after they had been employed for 12 weeks. Regrettably, this has caused some employers to “use” people for a limited time and then replace them unceremoniously. There is always a downside when employer regulations change. It generated more income for temp agencies yet also increased the risk of them getting dragged into what are, in reality, disputes between employer and employees.
After discussing with his insurers we were able to help Derek construct a reply which referred the complainant to the T&C’s they had previously agreed to. These made it clear that Derek’s company worked within the regulations yet were not responsible for maintaining their continuous employment.
Now go away… politely of course
The fact that they had tried to gain unwarranted compensation from his company meant Derek was well within business boundaries to remove the over aggressive temp from his register. If they had been less confrontational they may have kept their position or, at least, Derek would have recommended soft skills courses for them to undertake before he could redeploy them. People do change for a whole variety of reasons, their personal circumstances having a huge amount to do with their persona.
A salutary tale yet Derek was reminded how important it is to maintain great (rather than cordial) relationships with clients. This would ensure they were well informed when someone who interviewed brilliantly started to lose the plot. So it makes sense to protect a business and it’s directors before vindictive allegations or requests for compensation are made. Personal attacks are not a form of defence when employment disputes are raised so he was grateful he had people “on his side” to defend him to the hilt and pay compensation that tribunals feel is appropriate.
Wrap up: People change yet you can still ensure you’re not dancing with the devil by undertaking the right checks, as long as they are fair and balanced, into people’s backgrounds. Indeed, insurers help you with this when you avail yourself of their protection.
Many plausible people have turned nasty and money certainly has a language of its own. The compensation culture is nothing new so tread carefully when it costs little, if anything, to mount a claim against a business. Don’t go overboard, ask your peers what the key risks are in their business.