Disciplinary procedures: common mistakes made by employers

Not following a disciplinary policy at all

 

If your employer has a contractual disciplinary policy but doesn’t follow this, your employer will be in breach of contract.

 

If you’re dismissed without your Employer following a contractual disciplinary policy you can bring a claim for breach of contract in a County Court or High Court, or wrongful dismissal (i.e. dismissal in breach of contract – regarding the notice period and loss of salary over the period in which the disciplinary period should have been followed) and unfair dismissal in an Employment Tribunal. If you’re dismissed before you have two years continuous service, then you don’t have a right to claim unfair dismissal, but you may have the right to claim breach of contract if the situation above applies to you.

 

In a case, in March 2014 the Supreme Court ruled that there’s an implied contractual right to a fair disciplinary process, a severe breach of which could enable an employee to obtain an injunction preventing the Employer from completing the process without starting again. In Chhabra v West London Mental Health NHS Trust this implied right was breached because the ‘conclusions’ of the person investigating the allegations against Chhabra had been amended extensively by an HR Advisor, resulting in alleged misconduct being wrongly categorized as gross misconduct. The Court recognized that it’s legitimate for the investigator to seek advice from HR about a procedure or to ensure the report is clear and covers all necessary matters, but not the extensive amendments that were carried out in this case.

 

In August 2015 an Employment Tribunal found that an employee was unfairly dismissed after he was told to “not bother coming back on Monday” during an argument with his manager. In Townsend v Commercial Storage Ltd, Mr Townsend was a driver for a small family business. Mr Townsend took this comment as a dismissal and left the workplace; Mr Cooke, the manager, made no attempt to contact Mr Towsend after this and later sent him his P45. Mr Townsend claimed unfair dismissal, but the Employer argued he had resigned and had not been dismissed. Mr Townsend was successful in his unfair dismissal claim with the Tribunal saying there was a total failure to adopt any sort of fair procedure.

 

However in 1974 in Futty v P & D Brekke's Ltd, Mr Futty – a fish filleter in Hull – was told by his foreman: “If you don’t like the job – f**k off!”. Fatty took this literally and did, finding himself another job! He then brought proceedings for unfair dismissal. Other fish filleters gave evidence concerning the meaning which should be given to the expression. After hearing these explanations, the Tribunal found that the foreman’s words were no more than “a general exhortation to get on with the job.” There had been no dismissal.

 

For more details on unfair dismissal, see our article on how your employees can come to an end.

Not warning the employee of the possible consequences of any disciplinary action before the disciplinary meeting

 

The Employer must tell the employee the possible outcome of any disciplinary action, to give him or her a fair chance of defending the allegation properly, so it shouldn’t come as a surprise to the employee later on that dismissal is a possibility.

Not setting out the nature of the accusations clearly to the employee

 

The Employer should set out the alleged misconduct clearly and should, throughout the disciplinary process, be consistent in what it is accusing the employee of. Any disciplinary sanction must be imposed only in respect of allegations that were adequately investigated and brought to the employee’s attention as part of the proceedings. For a misconduct dismissal to be fair, an employer has to show that at the time of the clearing it believed the employee to be guilty of misconduct and that it had reasonable grounds for believing this, having carried out “as much investigation into the matter as was reasonable in all the circumstances.”

 

There are no ‘rules’ as to the level of investigation the Employer should conduct into the employee’s suspected misconduct; it will depend on the particular circumstances. However, the inquiry should take place before any disciplinary action, and the following points need to be considered when experimenting:

 

Identify the allegation to be investigated

 

The investigating ‘officer’ must have no previous involvement in or of the matter, if at all possible; should keep an open mind, and conduct the investigation as quickly as possible

 

The ‘accused’ employee and witnesses need to be interviewed (not all witnesses need to be questioned if a fact has been established)

 

Keep notes/records of the investigation meeting. Ask the witnesses if they agree that the notes are a true reflection of the conversation. Advise witnesses of their duty of confidentiality

 

An investigation report should be drawn up which sets out a summary of the evidence, including any inconsistencies. This report should not draw any conclusions, that is the role of the disciplinary panel. Although the investigator may have the remit to recommend whether the matter should proceed to a disciplinary hearing or not

 

Acas produced a guide to Conducting Workplace Investigations in October 2015, which you can read here.

Not giving the employee the relevant evidence against him or her

 

The Employer should provide the employee with all the evidence, typically in the form of witness statements, in advance of the disciplinary hearing. Ideally, the evidence should be provided when the employee is invited to the hearing, or at least far enough in advance for him or her to be able to prepare a proper ‘defence.’

 

In August 2014, the former BBC Head of Technology was found to be unfairly dismissed (although the Tribunal ruled he had partially contributed to his dismissal) and the Tribunal said they were “astonished” at the BBC’s “cavalier disregard for any of the norms of a fair disciplinary process.” This disregard included:

 

discussions of his dismissal in advance, as a foregone conclusion

 

interviewing replacements before the disciplinary procedure had begun

 

failing to investigate the hearings

 

They are sending him 16,000 documents one day before the hearing.

Not giving ‘lesser’ warnings where they are appropriate

 

In some cases, the alleged misconduct will be so severe that summary dismissal for a first offence will be justified. However, in cases of minor misconduct, a series of warnings before discharge will be more appropriate.

 

There are no national guidelines to determine what gross misconduct is – each Employer will have behaviours which they won’t tolerate at work, depending on the Employer and the nature of the book and type of workplace. The action must be so profound that it irrevocably destroys any trust and confidence on the employers’ part.

 

In a case in September 2013 (Brito-Babapulle v Ealing Hospital NHS Trust), the Employment Appeal Tribunal found that when considering the fairness of a dismissal, and in particular whether the decision to dismiss falls within the band of reasonable responses open to a fair employer, an employer (or Tribunal) should not jump straight from a finding of gross misconduct to a conclusion that dismissal was within the range of appropriate responses. The Employer should consider any mitigating factors, such as exemplary service, expected behaviour, and conduct, the consequences of dismissal (for their career), any provocation, length of service, consistent treatment between employees – a finding of gross misconduct won’t necessarily justify instant dismissal.

 

Warnings are given in ‘bad faith’ – if notice is given (that later is used as part of a redundancy selection exercise or the next stage in a disciplinary process) in ‘bad faith’ it may not be safely relied upon by an Employer. You would like to assume that an appeal would resolve this issue, but what if the employee appealed against the original decision and the appeal was also conducted in bad faith? Or where the employee was prevented from appealing? In Way v Spectrum Property Care Limited 2015, Mr The way was given a final written warning for hiring a relative without disclosing this fact, which was in breach of company fair recruitment procedures.

 

His manager, Mr Brooks, gave him this warning despite knowing of Mr Way’s relationship with the new starter and agreeing with the recruitment. Mr Way wanted to appeal but was told that if he did, there was a risk that the situation could be escalated to a dismissal. Several months later, Mr Way sent inappropriate e-mails in breach of his Employer's rules, and as the previous warning was still ‘live,’ he was dismissed. The Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal said that his dismissal was fair. However, the Court of Appeal noted the Tribunal had not considered the ‘bad faith’ argument and sent the case back to Tribunal. The court said that a disciplinary warning given in bad faith is not to be taken into account when deciding whether there is sufficient reason for dismissing an employee.

 

So, what would make a warning be in ‘bad faith’? If the Employer knows the grounds for that warning do not exist; if the warning is because of a protected characteristic under the Equality Act; it covers up someone else’s misconduct or poor performance; it’s explicitly given to make it easier to dismiss the employee at a later date; there is evidence of pre-determination of guilt; the employee is misled about his right to appeal or not allowed to appeal.

 

A warning will still count as being in good faith, even if – the Employer’s genuine belief that there were grounds for the warning was mistaken; there were procedural problems with the disciplinary process; the warning that was given was at a higher level than a Tribunal themselves would have imposed; the employee, him/herself, did not this it was fair.

 

Therefore, if an employee alleges that an earlier warning was given in bad faith, the disciplinary panel should consider whether there are grounds to look at the previous warning (particularly if the latest situation could lead to dismissal).

 

Using previous disciplinary warnings:

 

Generally, previous warnings can be taken into account if they are still ‘live‘ (i.e., still exist on the employee’s file and as long as the notice was given in good faith) – Davies v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council 2013 and Tyre v UKME (UK Mission Enterprise Ltd) 2016. Previous notices that have expired should not be used as the principal reason for dismissal. However, earlier statements that have passed which are used as a relevant factor in the fairness of the new decision may be allowed – Airbus UK Ltd v Webb 2008 (as long as they are not the principal reason for dismissal – Diosynth Ltd v Thomson 2006). In 2017, in Stratford v Auto Trail VR Ltd the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that an expired warning COULD be taken into account when considering whether a dismissal was fair or unfair (when the final disciplinary offence was not in itself gross misconduct) – but this was because the employee Stratford had a terrible disciplinary record (17 incidents in less than 13 years). The Employer did not consider this would every change.

 

In a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision (Wincanton Group plc v Stone) the EAT said that the Acas Code of Practice does not require similarity of misconduct between a first and second offence; any different type of misconduct could result in further disciplinary action. However, Tribunals may take into account the nature of the offence that led to the warning when deciding if a dismissal was fair – similar misconduct may lead to a more severe penalty; misconduct that was dissimilar may lead to less severe punishment.

 

In Ham v The Governing Body of Bearded Humanities College, the Employment Appeal Tribunal, at the end of 2015, considered whether a series of relatively minor acts of misconduct could be ‘aggregated’ to allow a fair dismissal without previous disciplinary warnings. Ms Ham was dismissed in 2011 on several grounds, none of which the college felt were gross misconduct in their own right. The original Tribunal found the dismissal to be unfair as the college had ‘totted up’ the individual acts of misconduct to justify dismissal on the grounds of gross misconduct. The college appealed, and the EAT found the Tribunal had been wrong, they should have looked at all the conduct ‘in its totality.’ The case returned to Tribunal to be reconsidered, and the Tribunal said the decision to dismiss was fair. Ms Ham then appealed, saying it had not been reasonable to dismiss her without issuing her any disciplinary warnings first. The EAT disagreed with her and found that the college had considered alternatives to dismissal and had considered giving disciplinary warnings but felt that release was appropriate under the circumstances.

Not allowing the employee to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing

 

It is a statutory right to allow the employee to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing. The right to be accompanied arises when a worker who is invited by his or her employer to attend a disciplinary or grievance hearing makes a reasonable request for a companion (i.e., a fellow worker or trade union representative) to participate in the hearing. See our new article here about whether you can audio-record disciplinary meetings.

 

A 2013 Employment Appeal Tribunal case (Toal v GB Oils Ltd) ruled that employees are exercising the statutory right to be accompanied at a disciplinary or grievance hearing are entitled to have present whomever they choose, provided the individual is a relevant union representative or work colleague. Employers cannot refuse a particular companion because their presence is ‘unreasonable’ – the ‘reasonable’ requirement does not extend to the identity of the companion. This ruling contradicts the Acas Code of Practice, which Acas updated in 2015. An Employee can, therefore, be accompanied by the employee/rep of his/her choice.

 

The maximum compensation for breach of the right to be accompanied is two weeks’ pay (subject to the statutory weekly pay cap). In Gnahoua v Abellio London Ltd 2017, the Employer, a bus company refused to allow a driver to be accompanied by either of two brothers who were union officials, as they were banned from attending workplace meetings because of previous threatening conduct. The Employment Appeal Tribunal believed the employee had not though suffered any loss of detriment by not having his chosen companion (and the disciplinary hearing had been conducted comprehensively). Therefore the claimant was entitled to £2 compensation!

 

In Talon Engineering Ltd v Mrs V Smith, in August 2018, the Employment Appeal Tribunal found that Mrs Smith was unfairly dismissed (after referring to her colleague as a ‘knob head’ in several e-mails!) because of the Employers's refusal to postpone her disciplinary hearing a second time because her union representative could not attend.

 

The first disciplinary hearing was postponed as Mrs Smith was unwell and then had a holiday booked. The hearing was rearranged, but her trade union rep was unavailable on that date, and Talon would not postpone the hearing again. Mrs Smith refused to attend the hearing, so Talon conducted the hearing without her, and she was dismissed without notice. She did appeal, but this was not successful. The original Tribunal said that no reasonable employer would have forgiven her and she won her claim. Talon Engineering appealed, but the EAT said the Tribunal’s decision was correct when it said the company had behaved in an “entitled and hasty” way.

 

Relying on evidence from one particular source/witness with no other corroborative evidence

 

There may be limited circumstances where one individual’s evidence is enough to lead to a disciplinary sanction, but an employer should always look for more. Employers should be alert to the problems of relying on one person’s evidence and always look for corroborative evidence, where this is possible.

 

In Farnaud v Dr Hadwen Trust Ltd, 2011, Mr Farnaud was a Science and Education Director at a medical and research charity. He had a heated discussion with his line manager, Mrs Eglington, who went on to submit a grievance about him. Dr Farnaud was disciplined and found to be guilty of aggressive and threatening behaviour and was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct.

 

The Employment Tribunal found that he was unfairly dismissed as the Employer had not interviewed Mrs Eglington (relying on her written grievance only) and had not questioned the witness to the event (depending on Mrs Eglinton’s interview of that witness). The Tribunal found that the Employer could not have had a reasonable belief about Mr Farnaud’s guilt based on reasonable grounds and didn’t conduct a thorough investigation or disciplinary process.

 

Read about using evidence from social media here.

Not giving an adequate appeal stage

 

The right of appeal is fundamental to ensuring natural justice. Employers should allow the employee to appeal when the outcome of the disciplinary hearing is communicated to him or her. Requests should be unbiased and not be a “foregone conclusion.”

 

In 2015 in Thomson v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed with the Tribunal that dismissal could be unfair if the Disciplinary Panel Chair had no previous experience of disciplinary hearings and their inexperience denied the claimant a fair hearing (it was a senior employee with serious allegations against her). The Employer argued that because disciplining a senior employee was a rare event, the Chair could not be expected to have experience with this. But the EAT felt that if a disciplinary process could result in dismissal then to avoid the risk of a Tribunal finding the procedure unfair; the Employer should have provided the Chair with training there and then on how to handle the disciplinary process.

 

If an employer wishes to have the option to increase a disciplinary sanction on appeal, it can only do so if this is explicitly stated in the disciplinary policy and the employee must be allowed a further right of appeal.

 

See “warnings given in ‘bad faith'” above.

 

If someone has been dismissed and the appeal has not yet been heard, can an employer advertise for a replacement? An employer can, but they would be best to wait if the need for a replacement is not urgent – this is because an employee could claim that the recruitment for his/her replacement meant the appeal outcome had been prejudged. Also, if the appeal is successful and the employee reinstated, then the new person who has been offered the job will need to have their offer withdrawn, which could lead to a breach of contract claim.

Not keeping adequate, clear records of the whole disciplinary process

 

Including – What happens if an employee and Employer disagree with the minutes/notes of a disciplinary or grievance hearing? An employer should provide a copy of the minutes/notes taken at the meeting to the employee. If the employee disagrees that the notes are accurate, the Employer should ask him/her to give a corrected version. If the employer agrees that the employee’s performance is authentic, the amendments can be decided as the record. If the Employer disagrees that the employee’s version is accurate, it should keep both versions on record. (Then both versions of the notes can be referred to at any later date, including at Tribunal).

 

Delays in dealing with disciplinary issues

 

Most cases should be dealt with within a matter of weeks, and unexplained delays in the disciplinary proceedings will always be frowned upon by tribunals. However, more complex or challenging cases (for example, where fraud or a criminal offence is alleged) will inevitably take longer.

 

See our main article on Disciplinaries for details of the 2015 case of Williams v Leeds United Football Club, where the High Court found that in principle there is no limit on the length of time that can pass between an employee’s gross misconduct and their dismissal without notice if the employer was unaware of the employee’s wrongdoing during that time.

 

Having the same person deal with the whole disciplinary process

 

A common failing found in tribunal claims is that the same individual is in charge of the disciplinary process from start to finish. Ideally, different people should carry out the investigation, disciplinary hearing and appeal stage, although this will not always be practicable, particularly for small employers. 

 

There have been several cases where the Tribunal looked at the appropriateness of using external HR consultants during the disciplinary process where the Employer is small in size and does not have sufficient staff to hear the disciplinary/appeal/conduct the investigation/needs professional advice etc., and Tribunals take the general view this is acceptable as long as it is made clear who makes the final decision to dismiss and the decisions are made appropriately.

 

7 things to always check before signing an employment contract👉👈

1. Job title and description

Knowing the scope of your employment is important because it describes the role and duties the employer can ask you to do. This is reflected in the job title and description. These should be specific and should match the job description for which you applied. If it is not precise enough, you might find yourself doing things you can’t or don’t want to do. It can also mean that you will end up dealing with a heavier workload than anticipated.

2. Bonuses and salary

The first thing to do when checking this section is to make sure that the salary is included in the one you negotiated. You should know how and when you will be paid. This section can include additional incentives like bonuses, health benefits, and travel expense reimbursements. It should be stipulated how and in which cases you can receive these. You need to see the exact criteria based on which you receive a bonus.

There are two types of bonuses, guaranteed and discretionary. A  discretionary bonus is one where information about the bonus is not disclosed in advance.

3. Cause of termination

The reasons the employer can give if they want to terminate the contract are reflected in the termination. Read this section carefully and ask the HR department for clarification if you don’t understand the legal jargon. The terms of termination need to be clear. Otherwise, you might end up agreeing to your termination at any time, without notice and worse, without any reason. This is termed ‘without cause.’

If the termination is because of ‘just cause’ it either means that you’ve broken some rules or that you have not delivered what you’ve promised. The cause of termination can also be your resignation. Here, make sure you read about the notice period.

You should also be careful if you find the term ‘sole discretion’ written in this section, in case, of the contract’s termination before its end date. This term can mean that your employer can decide to fire you without talking to you first. This eliminates any possibility for discussion, notification or compromise. A friendlier alternative gives both the employee and the employer a say in the matter.

4. Start/end date and notice period

The start and end dates need to be clearly stated. Having a stipulated notice period is important because it gives both parties some time to prepare for their next step. This period might be anywhere between one week and three months, and in many cases depends on the length of your employment.

5. Holidays and sick leave

Both of these vary depending on the country you are working in, and there is strict legislation that stipulates the duration of your holiday and the terms for sick leave. The points that should be clearly stated about holidays are:

·         How many days of vacation you are entitled to

·         When does the holiday year start

·         Whether you can take holidays at certain busy times of the year, like Christmas

·         Whether you can carry any days over to the next year

In many countries paid sick leave is a statutory requirement, meaning that there are laws written about it. Most of Europe has legal requirements for sick leave. In the US, the state does not require employees to have paid sick days, but the government guarantees unpaid sick leave in case of serious illness.  Make sure you know the law before you look at this section of the contract.

6. Working hours

Check whether you need to work the weekends or in the evenings and if so how will you be paid for this.  In some cases instead of being paid for overtime, these hours can be converted into days off or holidays commonly called “time-in-lieu.” You need to be clear on company policy and be prepared to negotiate. A good work-life balance is a health requirement in the long run and boundaries need to be set. But again, the working culture is different for every country and company, so be sure to know in advance what you’re getting into.

7. Restrictive Clauses

These take effect after the termination of employment and are important for employers because they protect the business, its clients and other employees. There are four of these, non-competition, non-solicitation, non-dealing, and non-poaching clauses. Knowing these terms and what they entail is important because they might restrict you from taking future jobs.

·         Non-competition clauses may limit you to work for a competitor of your former employer

·         Non-solicitation clauses prevent you from poaching clients and suppliers of your former employer

·         Non-dealing clauses prevent former employees from dealing with former customers and suppliers

·         Non-poaching clauses prevent former employees from poaching former colleagues

Our Youth Leader Murdock Emisembe Attending the National Dialogue Conference One at Nairobi Ufungamani house

What is child labour

Considerable differences exist between the many kinds of work children do. Some are difficult and demanding, others are more hazardous and even morally reprehensible. Children carry out a very wide range of tasks and activities when they work.

Defining child labour

Not all work done by children should be classified as child labour that is to be targeted for elimination. Children’s or adolescents’ participation in work that does not affect their health and personal development or interfere with their schooling, is generally regarded as being something positive. This includes activities such as helping their parents around the home, assisting in a family business or earning pocket money outside school hours and during school holidays. These kinds of activities contribute to children’s development and to the welfare of their families; they provide them with skills and experience and help to prepare them to be productive members of society during their adult life.

The term “child labour” is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development.

It refers to work that:
is mental, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and
interferes with their schooling by:
depriving them of the opportunity to attend school;
obliging them to leave school prematurely; or
requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work.
In its most extreme forms, child labour involves children being enslaved, separated from their families, exposed to serious hazards and illnesses and/or left to fend for themselves on the streets of large cities – often at a very early age. Whether or not particular forms of “work” can be called “child labour” depends on the child’s age, the type and hours of work performed, the conditions under which it is performed and the objectives pursued by individual countries. The answer varies from country to country, as well as among sectors within countries.

The agriculture sector comprises activities in agriculture, hunting forestry, and fishing.

The industry sector includes mining and quarrying, manufacturing, construction, and public utilities (electricity, gas and water).

The services sector consists of wholesale and retail trade; restaurants and hotels; transport, storage, and communications; finance, insurance, real estate, and business services; and community as well as social personal services.
The worst forms of child labour

Whilst child labour takes many different forms, a priority is to eliminate without delay the worst forms of child labour as defined by Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 182:

(a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;
(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.

Labour that jeopardizes the physical, mental or moral well-being of a child, either because of its nature or because of the conditions in which it is carried out, is known as “hazardous work”.

Background of The UNION

KENYA PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES WORKERS UNION was first registered as a Kenya Private Universities Non-Teaching Workers Union on 22 January 2013 under the Labor Relations Act, 2007, Kenyan Law. The Union was established by Mr Peter E Owiti after he met staff who were struggling as he took a course in Human Resources at one of the private universities. He was drawn to solve these problems by first searching for a union to support these workers and found there was non, but he was advised to start one after some consultation with the Labor Office.  So he registered a union as Kenya's private non-teaching Universities Union and later the lectures requested to be incorporated, then he later changed the name to Kenya's Private Universities workers ’ union. Since then the Union has served more than a thousand workers. The Union was fully operational in the same year.

C189 - Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189)

The General Conference of the International Labour Organization, Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, and having met in its 100th Session on 1 June 2011, and Mindful of the commitment of the International Labour Organization to promote decent work for all through the achievement of the goals of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, and Recognizing the significant contribution of domestic workers to the global economy, which includes increasing paid job opportunities for women and men workers with family responsibilities, greater scope for caring for ageing populations, children and persons with a disability, and substantial income transfers within and between countries, and Considering that domestic work continues to be undervalued and invisible and is mainly carried out by women and girls, many of whom are migrants or members of disadvantaged communities and who are particularly vulnerable to discrimination in respect of conditions of employment and of work, and to other abuses of human rights, and

Considering also that in developing countries with historically scarce opportunities for formal employment, domestic workers constitute a significant proportion of the national workforce and remain among the most marginalized, and Recalling that international labour Conventions and Recommendations apply to all workers, including domestic workers, unless otherwise provided, and Noting the particular relevance for domestic workers of the Migration for Employment Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 97), the Migrant Workers (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1975 (No. 143), the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156), the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and the Employment Relationship Recommendation, 2006 (No. 198), as well as of the ILO Multilateral Framework on Labour Migration: Non-binding principles and guidelines for a rights-based approach to labour migration (2006), and Recognizing the special conditions under which domestic work is carried out that make it desirable to supplement the general standards with standards specific to domestic workers so as to enable them to enjoy their rights fully, and

Recalling other relevant international instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, and in particular its Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children and its Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, and Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals concerning decent work for domestic workers, which is the fourth item on the agenda of the session, and Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of an international Convention; adopts this sixteenth day of June of the year two thousand and eleven the following Convention, which may be cited as the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011.

Membership Process

Membership recruitment is done through members Signing FORM S that is known as a check-of form which is an ORDER in itself. The process is done through an agent at the employer's workplace that is appointed by the union to carry out the excises. Once signed it is served to the employer for deduction as per Section 48 of Labor Relations Act, 2007.
After the First deduction having been done and sent to our union Gazetted account, the union prepares a membership card that we give to our Members as proof that they are bonafide members. Our membership is for both teaching and non-teaching staff.