Skip to main content Skip to accessibility
This website is not compatible with your web browser. You should install a newer browser. If you live in Jersey and need help upgrading call the States of Jersey web team on 440099.
Government of Jerseygov.je

Information and public services for the Island of Jersey

L'înformâtion et les sèrvices publyis pouor I'Île dé Jèrri

  • Choose the service you want to log in to:

  • gov.je

    Update your notification preferences

  • one.gov.je

    Access government services

  • CAESAR

    Clear goods through customs or claim relief

  • Talentlink

    View or update your States of Jersey job application

Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

  • demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision

  • providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 5 December 2014:

Decision Reference: MD-S-2014-0148

Decision Summary Title :

DS Make Order - Extend unfair dismissal qualifying period

Date of Decision Summary:

5 December 2014

Decision Summary Author:

Policy Principal

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

NA

Written Report

Title :

WR Make Order - Extend unfair dismissal qualifying period

Date of Written Report:

5 December 2014

Written Report Author:

Policy Principal

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

Public

Subject: Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014

Decision(s): The Minister made the Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014.

Reason(s) for Decision: The Chief Minister had proposed in his vision for a strategic policy (dated 24 October 2014) to extend the qualifying period for protection against unfair dismissal. The Minister for Social Security agreed and this Order will prescribe a qualifying period of one year where employment commences on or after 1 January 2015. Where employment has commenced before 1 January 2015, an employee will continue to qualify for protection against unfair dismissal after 26 weeks’ service. 

 

The Minister has acted quickly with the intention of giving the necessary support to businesses to boost growth and to encourage employers to create opportunities for local jobseekers. The Minister considers that the longer qualifying period might offset some of the other perceived challenges that local employers face, particularly small businesses.

Resource Implications: The financial and manpower impact of these proposals on the States as an employer is minimal, both in terms of the numbers of employees dismissed and the costs in dealing with their dismissal.

Action required: The Policy Principal to notify the Law Draftsman that the Order has been made and to forward the signed and sealed Order to the Publications Editor, States Greffe. The Greffier of the States to be requested to notify the States of the making of the Order.

Signature:

 

 

Position:

 

 

Date Signed:

 

 

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

 

Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014

Accompanying report - Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014

 

SUMMARY

 

This Ministerial Order is made to give effect to the Minister’s proposal to introduce a longer qualifying period for protection against unfair dismissal under the Employment (Jersey) Law 2003 (the ‘Employment Law’).

 

The Employment (Qualifying Period) (Jersey) Order 2014 prescribes, for the purpose of Article 73(1) of the Employment Law, a 52 week qualifying period where employment commences on or after 1 January 2015. Where employment has commenced before 1 January 2015, the employee will retain the right to claim unfair dismissal after 26 weeks’ service. 

 

BACKGROUND

 

Article 73 of the Employment Law provides that, to qualify for protection against unfair dismissal, employees must have 26 weeks’ continuous service ending with the effective date of termination, other than where dismissal is on ‘automatically unfair’ grounds which means that an employee is protected against unfair dismissal from day one of employment. The Law permits the Minister to set a different qualifying period by Ministerial Order.

 

The qualifying periods for protection against unfair dismissal in other jurisdictions are;

 

  • One year in the Isle of Man
  • One year in Guernsey
  • One year in Northern Ireland
  • Two years in the UK[1]

 

The equivalent qualifying period has often been amended in the UK and it has ranged from 26 weeks to two years since the protection was introduced in 1971. The UK Government’s stated rationale for the move from one year to two years in 2012 was to make a positive impact on business confidence and thereby boost growth.

 

In 2012, employer representative groups in Jersey expressed concern that our 26 week qualifying period deters employers from employing staff and creating new jobs, primarily due to the perceived risk of an employee making a complaint to the Jersey Employment Tribunal. The Employment Forum consulted on whether the 26 week qualifying period should be extended and recommended to the former Minister in 2013 that, whilst it was not opposed, in principle, to a one year qualifying period, it found no evidence that a longer qualifying period would have a positive impact on employment and job opportunities.

 

The Chief Minister submitted a statement to the States Assembly on 24 October 2014 setting out his vision for a strategic policy which included a proposal to remain aligned to competitor jurisdictions by extending the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims. The Minister for Social Security (the ‘Minister’) agreed to extend the period to one year, noting that a longer qualifying period might give an employer the confidence to create new jobs and that it might offset some of the other challenges that employers face, particularly small businesses.

 

Consideration was given to introducing a qualifying period longer than one year. Whilst the UK has a 2 year qualifying period, our other nearest competitors (the Isle of Man, Northern Ireland and Guernsey) each have a one year qualifying period. In the UK, the risk of an unfair dismissal claim is potentially far greater to an employer because the maximum amount of compensation that may be awarded for unfair dismissal is £90,494 whereas, in Jersey, the maximum unfair dismissal award for an employee with up to one year’s service is 4 weeks’ pay. In addition, the UK has far more extensive ‘day-one’ rights that do not require a qualifying period of employment, including family friendly rights and protection against discrimination based on sex, age, disability and religion. Given the other factors, it was concluded that a one year period is a reasonable period of time in which an employer has the opportunity to assess a new member of staff through the full annual cycle of a new job.

 

It should also be noted that the proposed move to a one year qualifying period brings a greater variance between employees who work under fixed-term contracts of 26 weeks or less and all other employees. Fixed-term contract employees will able to claim unfair dismissal up to 39 weeks sooner than permanent employees (compared to 13 weeks sooner with a 26 week qualifying period). This is because employees who are employed under fixed-term contracts for 26 weeks or less are protected against unfair dismissal once they have completed at least two-thirds of their contract by the effective date of termination, subject to a minimum of 13 weeks’ continuous service. The 13 week minimum period of service cannot be changed by Order and so a primary law change is expected to amend the position in the longer-term, subject to consultation by the Employment Forum in 2015. 

 

The Minister and the Chief Minister have acted quickly with the intention of giving the necessary support to businesses to boost growth and create employment opportunities for local jobseekers. The change would take effect only in relation to employment that commences on or after 1 January 2015.

 

Financial and manpower

 

The financial and manpower impact of these proposals on the States as an Employer is minimal, both in terms of the numbers of employees dismissed and the costs in dealing with their dismissal. 

1

 


[1] For more details about the qualifying periods in these jurisdictions, see the Forum’s consultation paper http://gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/ID%20UnfairDismissal%2020130201%20JJ.pdf

Back to top
rating button