Member Blog

The Government has recommended that dentists join GPs and other health professionals in discussing their patients’ overall health and lifestyle during appointments.

With oral health greatly affected by diet, exercise, smoking and drinking habits, the British Dental Health Foundation hopes the initiative will encourage more people to consider how their lifestyle could impact on their oral health.

Chief Executive of the Foundation, Dr Nigel Carter, said: “Taking the time out to discuss a patient’s smoking habit, alcohol consumption levels or poor diet could save lives, as all of those are associated with the risk of developing mouth cancer.

“If the healthcare profession, and particularly the dental profession, discussed with their patients how their oral health could be improved, I firmly believe we would see the number of developing dental diseases fall across a period of time.”

Research has shown that sugary foods and drinks can damage oral health, while studies have proven that people who stay fit and healthy are 40 per cent less likely to develop gum disease.

Mouth cancer remains a major issue in the UK with cases rising by 46 per cent since 1997. It is estimated that 30,000 people will die from the disease in the next decade unless more is done to change their lifestyles.

According to dental health experts, less than half of all adults have an acceptable oral hygiene routine, with the average time spent brushing just 45 seconds as opposed to the recommended two minutes. More worryingly still, figures from the Adult Dental Health Survey also revealed that a quarter of adults skip brushing altogether at least once a day.

Poor oral health has links with poor all-round health. Serious illnesses such as head and neck cancers, for example, are much more likely to be diagnosed in patients suffering from advanced gum disease.

Dr Carter said: “There is an increasing body of clinical evidence of the systemic links between poor oral health and some of the biggest causes of serious poor health and death in the UK. Gum disease may contribute to the furring of the arteries, which can cause heart disease. People with gum disease are also nearly twice as likely to develop diabetes.”

Employers who encourage employees to lead a healthy lifestyle and look after their oral health could create a more productive workforce and potentially reduce absenteeism.

Westfield Health’s Chamber Primary Health Plan, which is available to all members of Norfolk Chamber of Commerce, includes a dental benefit, which enables employees to claim back the cost of private and NHS check-ups and treatment, up to set limits.

Jeremy Revell, Managing Director of celebrity agency Revellation, introduced the Chamber Plan for his staff. He said “As an employer, you have reassurance that your staff are more likely to attend dental check-ups and other important health checks because they know that the plan is helping to cover the cost.

“They may even go more regularly as a result – and the better staff feel, the better they will perform.”

For more information about the Chamber Plan, visit Chamber Services/Health & Wellbeing

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has welcomed plans to reform the ‘no win, no fee’ system having cited high legal costs in settling personal injury claims as one of the main reasons for the general rise in motor insurance premiums. The planned reforms by the Ministry of Justice aim to balance the costs more fairly between the claimant and defendant, but there are wider implications for all parties if the legislation goes ahead.

Boswell Director, Ashley Minors, said: “At present, the ‘no win, no fee’ process allows a claimant to embark on a lawsuit without the fear of incurring any upfront costs and allowing solicitors to make their money from what is effectively a ‘success fee’ charged to the defendant after a case is won. The reforms would remove the ability of claimants to recover their costly insurance premiums and their own lawyers’ fees from losing defendants; instead, the costs will have to be paid out of any final award for damages. The planned reforms should put the brake on runaway legal costs and mean a better deal for genuine claimants and insurance customers, lowering legal costs and helping to cap motor insurance premiums. The overall aim is to make claimant lawyers more cautious to take on cases, but also to encourage claimants to take an interest in what they are paying their lawyer.”

The ‘no win, no fee’ system was introduced in 2000 when legal aid was abolished for personal injury claims to enable anyone, regardless of their means, access to justice. However, 12 years later the number of people seeking ‘justice’ creeps up and up with Ministers believing the current system promotes a ‘compensation culture’ with claimants embarking on cases because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Plans to overhaul the current ‘no win, no fee’ arrangements will effectively see a u-turn in the legislation reverting back to a process adopted in the 1990s in an attempt to put a stop to exploitation of the current system and strike a better deal for genuine claimants and insurance customers. What this means for insurers is lower premiums as legal costs from unnecessary claims are currently one of the main reasons for the general rise in motor insurance claims.

Reservations over whether the changes will prevent people of “ordinary means” from obtaining justice or defending themselves in court were raised by the parents of the murdered schoolgirl, Milly Dowler, who sued the News of the World in 2011 for phone hacking. Without access to a conditional fee agreement (CFA), which protected them from this risk of being liable for thousands of pounds in costs, the couple would not have been able even to embark on the legal journey. Others have voiced the opinion that with only around 25% of accident victims ever making a claim they’re attacking a problem that doesn’t exist.

Although the changes were due to come into effect in October 2012, it will be sometime yet before we know the outcome of these controversial reforms as it was recently announced the Ministry of Justice will order a six month delay to further consider the implications of this legislation – watch this space!

The Cala Homes saga refuses to go away for the Secretary of State, who has thrown in the towel at the last minute on the challenge to his decision to refuse Cala Homes planning Permission.

What is prematurity?

Prematurity is the argument that planning permission should be refused not because a proposal is unacceptable in itself but because to grant approval would prejudice emerging policy.

Until recently it was a rarity in the planning system, which has traditionally frowned upon its use as a reason for refusing permission. PPS3 makes it clear that prematurity alone should not justify a refusal and guidance published in 2005 states that a refusal on the grounds of prematurity will not be justified unless the development is so substantial as to predetermine decisions about the scale, location or phasing of development that will be made by the emerging policy.

Inspectors have generally avoided prematurity, instead placing increasing weight on an emerging policy document as it makes it way through the adoption process.

So why is it a problem now?

There has been a marked increase in the number of appeals being refused on the grounds of prematurity in recent months.

For example, the Secretary of State justified overturning a recommendation to allow Cala Homes appeal in Winchester on the basis that, while the scheme was generally acceptable, granting permission in advance of the local authority having a chance to complete its ongoing review of planning policy would prejudice the outcome of that review. This was despite the local authority having only just begun the process of public consultation and any new planning policy being years away from adoption.

Used in this way, prematurity acts as an incentive for local authorities who are hostile to development to drag their feet on policymaking. The more they delay adoption, the longer they can resist new development.

Prematurity also undermines the PPS3 five year housing land supply requirement and is difficult to reconcile with the proposed presumption in favour of sustainable development, which is meant to apply when the Development Plan is out-of-date. If local authorities can refuse applications because they are premature the presumption becomes meaningless.

Where does Cala come into all of this?

Cala’s appeal was one of the first refused recently on the grounds of prematurity and Cala’s challenge to the decision was due to be heard in the High Court later this week.

We now understand that the Secretary of State has had a last minute change of heart and has agreed to his decision being quashed. While details are sketchy, an acknowledgement by the Secretary of State that his decision was unlawful throws into doubt the increasing use of prematurity as a reason for refusal and has implications for many other development proposals.

Comment: We have been expressing concern about the Secretary of State’s new found enthusiasm for prematurity as a reason for refusing planning permission for some time. The planning system has, until recently, rightly sought to confine the use of prematurity to very narrow circumstances because of the uncertainty and unfairness that it causes.

We therefore welcome the Secretary of State’s recognition that his use of prematurity has gone too far. This news will help to put prematurity firmly back in its box and give developers much more confidence to move forward with proposals at a time when planning policy is undergoingmajor review.

The Government opened non-domestic applications for the RHI scheme in November 2011 and look set follow-up with domestic applications later this year, coinciding with the launch of the Green Deal.

So what is the Renewable Heat Incentive?

To meet EU targets for Carbon reductions the government introduced the National Renewable Energy Plan, aimed at meeting a 15% renewable energy target for all energy supply by 2020, this includes electricity, heating and transport needs.

Around 80% of domestic energy use can be attributed to water and space heating, this equate to 44% of the total UK energy demand across all sectors.

The RHI has been introduced to encourage the use of renewable technologies for the production of water and space heating, enabling users to benefit from tariff payments to help reduce paybacks, which previously had been considered a major obstacle in utilising such technologies due to high capital investment.

The scheme effectively pays for heat generated via renewable sources, and one of the major hurdles to overcome in the setting up RHI’s was to eliminate the misuse of the scheme; for example: running the heating constantly and opening windows to then burn more fuel and thus receive more payment!

To overcome such anomalies a system should meet all the requirements set out by the scheme and be eligible for inclusion; applications will be assessed and administered by Ofgem, more information can be found at their website: ofgem E-Serve website

What comprises an eligible system?

Eligible loads

• Must be a building, defined as enclosed and long lasting, includes glass houses
• Applies to water and space heating
• Includes process heating, i.e. heat generated for a production purposes
• Systems first commissioned on or after 15th July 2009

Non eligible loads:

• External distribution losses, i.e. piped supply between external plant and supplied building
• Heat used for generating electricity
• Underground heating of external surfaces, i.e. heated football pitches
• Temporary structures, such as polytunnels

An eligible load must also be measurable with the aid of approved and compliant meters to Class 2 accuracy.

Equipment and plant of 45kW or less must be MCS (Micro Generation Scheme) certified and installed by MCS approved installers to qualify for RHI’s, larger plant will be assessed by Ofgem for eligibility.

Which technologies are currently supported by the RHI?

Biomass boilers

“Biomass boilers generate heat through burning organic matter, primarily wood. The heat is usually used to produce hot water or steam, the latter being more suitable for industrial applications. The wood, derived directly from forestry or as a forestry by-product is commonly supplied in the form of wood chips, logs or pellets.”

Energy from waste combustion (the biomass proportion of municipal waste)

“More than half of the rubbish households throw away is organic, renewable matter, such as food or paper products. Although it is usually better from an environmental perspective to reuse, recycle or produce biogas from these materials, this is not always possible and combustion can offer a better option than disposal to landfill, which generates harmful greenhouse gas emissions. Due to its renewable biomass proportion, currently around half the heat produced by burning municipal waste is renewable heat.”

Heat pumps (ground, water source)

“Heat pumps are electrically (or occasionally gas) driven heat exchangers that extract renewable solar heat from the air, ground or water. The heat pump extracts low level heat from outside and upgrades the temperature so that it is warm enough to heat space and water inside the building.”

Deep geothermal

“Geothermal systems use energy stored in the form of heat deep underground. Normally this heat has to be extracted from several hundred metres below the surface. Hot water or steam is produced by extracting the underground heat using pipes carrying water. Geothermal systems are large scale and can have a variety of heat uses, including district heating.”

Solar thermal

“Solar thermal technologies collect heat from the sun onto a collector which transfers the heat energy to a working liquid. This liquid can then be used directly to provide hot water within a building, or an exchanger can transfer the heat from the working liquid to the water.”

Biogas Combustion

Biogas is gas produced from renewable materials such as food waste, commercial waste, farm waste or sewage, most commonly through the anaerobic digestion of those materials. For the purpose of heat generation, biogas can be burned and used to create heat directly or to boil water and produce steam.

To date there is no facility to include Air Source heat pumps; however that is not to say this form of technology will not be included in the future as further research is ongoing to determine methods of metering and data collection.

What are the tariffs and how are they claimed?

The tariffs are set dependant on the heat output and technology used and an eligible system will provide a return, indexed link to RPI, for 20 years. Typically one can expect a capital expenditure paypack on most systems within 8-10 years, which means up to 10 years of income stream to follow, which would typically cover fuel costs.

As a method of dissuading fraudulent misuse, biomass boilers are split into two tiers of tariff, the first tier providing a higher tariff for the first 1314 peak load hours, a lower tariff being set for the remainder.

The owner of the plant is the recipient of the RHI scheme and will be required to make quarterly meter readings to Ofgem who will then administer the whole process. Ofgem retain the right to carry out inspections of plant.

The following link below will display current tariff information:

Table of tariffs

A typical case study for a non-domestic installation:

• A 38kW biomass boiler, delivering 95,103kW/h
• Consuming 23 tonnes of pellet fuel, at £170 per tonne, equating to £3910 per year
• Comparison cost of oil would be 7,800 litres at £0.64 per litre, equating to £4,992 per year
• Installation cost: £60,000
• Tier 1 return:

o Installed capacity x 1314 peak load hours

o 38 x 1314 = 49,932kW/h

o Rate x 49,932

o 0.079 x 49,932 = £3,944.63

• Tier 2 return:

o Rate x Remaining kW/h

o 0.002 x 45,171 = £903.42

• Total tariff returns: £4,848.05
• Annual fuel saving: £1,082
• Total annual return: £5,930.05
• Capital investment payback: ~ 10 years

Refer to the links below for the Government DECC website and additional information:

DECC Renewable Heat Incentive Scheme

Renewable Heat Incentive Policy Document

DECC Press release: 10/03/2011

RenEnergy

Is your business leveraging Facebook? If not you may be missing out on a rich seam of opportunity.

Recently released figures from Experian Hitwise show that Facebook is the most popular social network in the UK accounting for over 50% of all visits to social networks. It’s not just in the social network category that the site is topping the charts with a massive 1.3 billion page views a month, it means that 1 in 6 views of a web site page is a Facebook one.

Facebook have announced a change in the functionality of their business pages https://www.facebook.com/about/pages and you should make sure you’re ready for this if you currently run a business page as it is quite a change. If you don’t you could be missing out on extra traffic. Experian’s figures show that for every Facebook fan a business has on it’s company Page it can expect an additional 20 visits to it’s web site over a year. 100 fans could mean an extra 2000 visits and with the lowest of conversion rates these could be valuable sales.

With 500 million hours spent on Facebook by UK visitors and an average visit time of 22 minutes there is plenty of opportunity to get your business in front of potential customers.

You can read the full Experian Hitwise report here

These days, businesses are more reliant than ever before on technology to help improve communications and to maximise efficiency in the workplace. The increased use of the internet, email and mobile technology has revolutionised the way companies operate and made IT a crucial factor in building and maintaining a successful company. Yet still even today too many companies think of technology as a necessary evil rather than truly embracing all the opportunities it can bring to make organisations more efficient.

In the past companies may have been able to get away with paying lip service to IT but in the fast changing modern world this will no longer be possible. Now, with the convergence of voice and data and the much greater reliance of mobile communications, it is crucial for all businesses to urgently develop a coordinated IT Strategy.

The changes in business working that we have seen over the last 10 years are very much only the beginning of what will happen over the next decade. At every level, faster and more accessible communication will be key. With globalisation, the increased use of home workers and the more flexible working environment; access to information needs to be seamless and instant.

Whilst the notion of the “paperless” office may not be a reality in the true sense, the need for electronic document management systems (EDMs) that can allow staff to access a wide range of documents wherever they may be in the world will only increase in the future. In an ever more competitive world, customers will be drawn to businesses that make communication with them as easy as possible. Good technology used properly will reflect well on your business and can help motivate your staff by taking some of the drudgery out of their day to day tasks.

Increasingly websites that used to be used merely as a shop window will now be more integrated with other back office systems. In the airline industry you don’t just book your flight online but also choose your seat, order your meal, “check in” and get live data from the airports about when your flight is due to land. This integration of the internet with other business processes will only become a lot more important as web use increases. Clients will want to have full visibility of every part of their interaction with your company. Once again easy access to information and the sharing of knowledge will be the key.

Of course with increased compliance legislation and the need for business continuity planning, technology can also provide a crucial back up in the event of an unforeseen disaster. With the proper storage of electronic data and the rerouting of voice and data over the internet, many companies can in effect be lifted from one location and taken to another with minimal disruption. This is where Cloud Computing comes into its own and its take up is now seen as inevitable over the next few years. Many companies are already working from “the cloud” and the usage is soon set to increase dramatically. It is also ideal for companies who wish to scale up (and down) without the need for costly capital expenditure-just look upon it as another utility that can be turned on or off as you need it.

Technology therefore must be embraced by all of the decision makers in a company and their views properly coordinated to enjoy all the benefits it can offer. Don’t think of IT simply as a cost but more as a real opportunity to embrace the opportunity for change and drive efficiency into your business. Currently, many organisations are still too reactive and fail to think strategically enough about how the world is changing and how their business is changing with it. As we are now in the 2nd decade of the 21st century, it is certain that the speed of change will only increase and certainly not slow down.

Just look at how the use of smartphones has increased over the years, look at how social media has grown and is being adapted by business, look at SEO (search engine optimisation) and unfortunately the ever present and greatly increasing threat of IT security. Who would have thought these things would be so important to all businesses even 5 years ago? It makes you wonder exactly what will we be discussing in 10 years’ time?

Maybe now you can see why getting a Strategic IT Road Map for your business is not a “nice to have” but in the modern day and age is simply a necessity. My advice is don’t be afraid of technology though-just embrace it with both hands before your competitors do!

As part of its procurement strategy for SizewellC, EDF Energy has partnered with the Suffolk and Norfolk chambers of Commerce to support local businesses that want to become part of the supply chain.

The Chambers are the first port of contact for businesses and agencies wishing to engage in the construction of this proposed nuclear new build project.

www.sizewellcsupplychain.co.uk website forms the central resource for all Norfolk and Suffolk businesses who wish to make the most of the opportunities arising out of the development.

On the site your company will be able to register interest in supplying the project by completing a short online form. Your capabilities will then be make available to EDF Energy and interested Tier 1 contractors.

The website will allow you to:

• Update your company details as your company develops its capabilities and standards
• Keep abreast of the latest developments
• Access a library of reference material and training documents
• Be kept informed about upcoming supply chain events

Directors are the ‘mind and will’ of the Company. They are personally and legally responsible for their own actions with unlimited liability.

Following changes to the law, Directors now have a greater personal accountability. There are over 200 statutes under which Directors can face penalties, fines, disqualification and even imprisonment.

A developing blame culture means a rising number of people are resorting to litigation against Directors and Officers. As well as regulatory bodies, the list of potential claimants include your shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and creditors. The cost of defending an action can be substantial.

Directors and Officers Liability Insurance protects the company Directors, Officers and Senior Managers against claims arising from their decisions and actions taken whilst managing the business. The insurance policy will pay on behalf of the Director, their legal costs and expenses and civil damages awarded against them.

Entity defence cover can be arranged in addition to the Directors and Officers Liability policy, offering protection for the ‘entity’ (the company) where actions are brought against the company rather than the individual. This is worthy of consideration following changes to the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act.

Below are some claim examples:

Timber Product Manufacturer HSE prosecution following serious injuries suffered by a machine operator whilst trying to clear an obstruction. There should have been a safety cut out facility stopping the machine from operating but this had been broken and disconnected. Defence Costs Incurred £25,700

Waste Management Company Transport Manager of a waste company prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service following an accident involving an unroadworthy vehicle operated by the company. Defence Costs Incurred £15,000

Giftware Manufacturer Contractual dispute following appointment of a website developer to design an online trading website for the company. The director concerned was not authorised to enter into the contract and the company cancelled the agreement. Costs £48,000

Distribution Company Claim for unfair and constructive dismissal against the Finance Director of a distribution company by a former employee, alleging sexual harassment and other inappropriate activity (sending text messages out of working hours etc). Costs £21,000

Glass Manufacturers Action taken against the directors of a glass manufacturing company by Trading Standards following allegations of pre-stamping of safety glass before it had passed the necessary testing procedure. Costs £25,000

Shipping Agents Shipping agents were required to hold all goods held on behalf of the claimant in a separate account, but following their liquidation, it was discovered that this was not the case, and the claimants would have to recover their goods as a normal creditor. Directors sued for £61,000

From February 1 2012, increases in the limits of various Employment Tribunal awards and other payments came into force.

These are all contained within the Employment Rights (Increase of Limits) Order 2011 and include the following main and most commonly used figures

1. The amount of a week’s pay to be applied will rise from £400 to £430.
2. The maximum compensatory award for unfair dismissal will rise from £68,400 to £72,300
3. The amount of guarantee pay (in situations of where employees are laid off) will increase from £22.20 to £23.50 a day.

For more information on these limits or any other related questions, please go to Chamber HR

Suitable Alternative Employment in a Redundancy Situation

A recently reported case has once again addressed the question of what does and does not constitute an offer of SUITABLE alternative employment where an employee is at risk of redundancy.

In the case of Readman v Devon Primary Care Trust, the Employment Appeal Tribunal was asked whether the original Employment Tribunal had erred in law in concluding that Mrs Readman had unreasonably refused an offer of alternative employment for her own reasons, when it had correctly concluded that the offer was an offer of suitable employment which a reasonable employee could have accepted.

The Claimant in the case had been employed continuously since 1976 but had ceased to work in a hospital setting in 1985 up to the reorganisation that eventually led to her dismissal.

She had expressed to her employers during the redundancy process the possibility that she might emigrate to Canada but had properly applied for all of the job opportunities that were her preferred options prior to making a final decision. Eventually, an offer of alternative employment was put to her to work as a Matron in a hospital setting, with the full amount of development and other support being put into place for her. Mrs Readman rejected this offer and her considerable redundancy payment was withheld as a result.

The original Employment Tribunal concluded that

“We find that the claimant rejected this offer without any considered attempt to explore what aspects, if any, of her current job would be lost, and what other duties might be required. The refusal was against her desire to emigrate and her desire if possible to be able to take advantage of her redundancy rights and benefits. For these reasons we find that the claimant unreasonably refused this offer of suitable alternative employment.”

The Employment Appeal Tribunal reversed this decision and ordered that the full redundancy payment due be paid to Mrs Readman. They concluded that

“Her main objection was the fact that she had taken a considered decision in 1985 to move away from working and delivering nursing in a hospital setting, in favour of delivering her nursing skills in a community setting. …… The Tribunal was of the view that a reasonable employee would have accepted the employer’s offer, but in our judgment this Tribunal wholly failed to grapple with the question of whether it was unreasonable for this employee, for the reasons which she gave, to accept that offer. It failed entirely to grapple with the question of whether the reason which she gave, as the fundamental reason for refusing it, was sound and justifiable or whether it was unreasonable for her to have taken that position.”

This case illustrates clearly that the decision on whether an offer of alternative employment is suitable or not is a very much a subjective test and it can be reasonable for one employee to reject the offer for their own reasons when some, if not all and any other employees to whom the same offer was put, would readily accept it.

Employers should therefore look closely at two questions in this situation. Firstly, is my offer to the employee one of suitable alternative employment? Secondly, is my employee’s refusal of that offer unreasonable? The inherent danger is that employers will say that they would have accepted the offer so it must be reasonable whereas the correct approach is to look at the individual reasons for any refusal and to evaluate those instead.

For all questions or advice in this area, please go to Chamber HR

More and more employers are requiring more and more flexibility from their workforce including the ability to request that there is work done on Sundays.

Retail outlets and a variety of recreation and leisure businesses are common examples where a regular requirement may exist. All employers should be aware of the legal implications of attempting to force employees to work where there is a reluctance or refusal to do so on the part of the employee.

As always in such circumstances, the first consideration is to examine whether the employee’s contract of employment or written statement of terms and conditions addresses the issue. If the contract is silent on the issue, or if it is ambiguous in its wording or mutual obligation, an agreed change to the provisions of the contract may be unavoidable.

• The contractual terms in relation to Sunday working should confirm in writing
• The actual frequency or potential likelihood for Sunday working
• The actual or likely hours of work on Sundays
• Any period of notice of such a requirement that will be given to employees
• Any premium payments that will be made for work done on a Sunday (there is no statutory right that requires employers to provide any extra payment for Sunday working)
• Any extra provision for overtime working beyond the normal hours of work on Sundays and any additional premium payments that will be made.
• Rules on how any refusal to work will be handled should also be incorporated. Employers will normally apply their existing disciplinary procedures to any such refusal which, if the contract is properly drafted, will normally constitute a breach of contract by the employee.
• Employers should also be careful not to inadvertently guarantee Sunday working where this is not their intention.

Shop and betting workers

Employees who work in a shop or in the betting industry (either at a betting shop open to the public or a bookmaker at a sports venue) have special rights. They can opt out of having to work on Sunday even if their contractsays that they have to work. Employer must inform their employees about this right within two months of the commencement of employment. However, the rights do not apply to those staff employed to work on Sundays only.

Employees with this statutory right can opt out of Sunday work by writing to their employer and giving them three months’ written notice of their wish to cease working on Sundays. Employers are not however required to offer extra work on other days instead and employees will therefore lose the wages for Sunday working if they opt out and no other work on other days is available.

As in many other areas of the law, employees can ask an Employment Tribunal to examine unfair treatment in this area. Special and careful consideration should however be given to those employees who express a religious belief in relation to Sunday working and all employees have the right not to be discriminated against for wishing to exercise such a belief.

If you are contemplating the introduction of Sunday working or are wishing to amend or scrap your existing arrangements, please contact Chamber HR helpline 02920 349 614