Shooting UK

From guns and gundogs to the latest shooting news; the complete online network for the British shooting community.

Court case prompts contract reminder

Court case prompts contract reminder

A recent case saw a gamekeeper’s dismissal compensation halved and his bonus scrapped due to the
ambiguous nature of his verbal contract.


By Selena Masson

Thursday, 29 January 2009

Gamekeeping organisations appeal to keepers to check their contracts

An Employment Appeals Tribunal case that concluded on 20 January saw a gamekeeper’s dismissal compensation halved and his bonus scrapped due to the ambiguous nature of his verbal contract.

The case has prompted gamekeeping organisations to highlight the need for proper employment contracts.

In January 2008, Sheikh Maher al-Tajir, who owns the 24,000-acre Blackford estate, in Perthshire, was accused of unfairly dismissing his gamekeeper
Chris Mulqueeney, and of reneging on a deal to pay a bonus of 10p per
pheasant shot, which Mr Mulqueeney claimed he was verbally promised.
Though Mr Mulqueeney was originally awarded £13,000 in unpaid bonuses and
compensation for loss of earnings, the Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled the
compensation should be halved and his bonus scrapped.

In the appeal, the judge, the HonourableLady Smith, found that “matters were left too uncertain to amount to an enforceable contract” and that no bonus should be paid. Helen Benson, of the Gamekeepers’ Welfare Network (GWN), said this case highlights the need for legally binding contracts. She told ST that an alarming number of keepers do not have a contract in place, relying instead on informal agreements: “I would recommend that all shoot employers and gamekeepers adhere to employment law and follow statutory procedures to avoid ambiguity and dispute.

With regard to contractual obligations, there is room for improvement, for example training for headkeepers is woefully inadequate. Employers have a duty of care inherent in the contract of employment and should ensure they are aware of their responsibilities to employees.”

The rest of this article appears in 29 January issue of Shooting Times.

What is YOUR opinion?

Join other ST readers in our forums to discuss your views.



Like this article? Mark this page on a social bookmarking website...



What are social bookmarking sites?


CompPrevious
The Hunting Act misses its mark

The Hunting Act misses its mark

Pro-hunting organisations have rejected Government...

CompNext
Red-sika hybrids are on the up

Red-sika hybrids are on the up

New research has revealed the extent to which Scot...


Guns

BSA Lightning XL air rifle review

BSA Lightning XL air rifle review

Take a look at the graceful lines and fantastic accuracy produced by t... Read more


More in Guns...


News

MPs' support for shooting

MPs' support for shooting

Newly elected MPs express their support for shooting through a... Read more


More in News...



Comments

Shooting Times Magazine

What's in this issue?

Don't miss our partridge and duck special in this week's Shooting Times (on sale Wednesday 1st September).
Plus, how to save money on feed on your shoot and as his Labrador nears the end of her pregnancy, Tony Jackson gets ready for the new arrivals. For all this and much more get down to your newsagents today!

Subscribe to magazine

Save up to 30% on a subscription to Shooting Times & Country Magazine, subscribe today!


Latest articles

BASC submits evidence to Parliament

BASC submits evidence to Parliament

After submitting written recommendations to the HASC, BASC see... Read more


Firearms control: deadline for submissions extended

Firearms control: deadline for submissions extended

Shooting community crashes Westminster computers as deadline for firea... Read more


More in Latest articles...


Subscribe to Shooting Times

Shooting Gazette Magazine

Save up to 30% on a subscription to Shooting Times & Country Magazine, subscribe today!