May 21st marked the day that the Supreme Court made its final decision in the case concerning the extent to which a partner in a law firm could benefit from the protection afforded to whistleblowers under the Employment Rights Act.
Prior to the judgment call, statutory protection as a whistleblower was only available to employees and workers within a law firm. Now, the Supreme Court holds that members of a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) are considered “workers” for the purpose of employment law. This would make a “self employed partner” in a law firm eligible for protection now too. They are likely to be “workers” for auto-enrollment purposes as well.
One of the ramifications of the ruling is that LLP’s are now under an obligation to auto-enroll all of their equity partners into pension schemes. In the event that an LLP doesn’t comply, some people within the partnership might have to face criminal sanctions.
If an employee is failed to be auto-enrolled, as required by section 3 of the Pensions Act 2008, it will be considered a criminal offence. Liability will not stop with the employer, either. Any officer of a corporate body, with “whose consent an offence is committed” will also be held liable.
The Pensions Act 2008 clearly defines what equals “qualified earnings” which ultimately determines if a person is eligible for auto-enrollment. Some HR experts believe that due to the recent Supreme Court ruling, human resource departments will be inundated with paperwork from officers rushing to get certain employees enrolled.
