Being told I can’t park on a public road by work

Gavin83

Undervalued wrote: »

Yes, done properly it is perfect possible for an employer to restrict where an employee can park and what means they may or may not use to travel to work. The only possible exception would be if the rules amounted to unlawful discrimination against a protected characteristic (most likely a disabled employee in this instance).

I'm not denying that companies would put such a clause in their contracts, at the end of the day as long as it isn't discriminatory they can put whatever they want in. However whether it's enforceable is another matter and I'm not aware of any court cases that has decided this matter one way or another.

Frankly it's unwise to limit how your staff can travel to work so I assume the company will suffer in some way. It's a balancing act between upsetting the local residents or upsetting your staff and I'd imagine by default most companies would side with staff. In all honesty making travelling to work difficult would likely make me leave the job unless everything else was perfect.

GreenTreen123

Yes there does have to be a compromise - but did I say by whom, no.

The stakeholders involved in the business are being affected and the company is directing the employees towards some behavior.

So there needs to be a compromise.....

martinbuckley

Maybe the residents should apply to have either single yellow lines or a parking permit scheme. They may live on the street, but they don't own the public highway.

Undervalued

martinbuckley wrote: »

Maybe the residents should apply to have either single yellow lines or a parking permit scheme. They may live on the street, but they don't own the public highway.

Indeed but that is not the point at issue here.

The employer has decided, for whatever reason, that it is in the best interests of the business to prohibit their staff from parking in that road. As I have explained, with very few exceptions, they are entitled to take that course of action.

Undervalued

Gavin83 wrote: »

I'm not denying that companies would put such a clause in their contracts, at the end of the day as long as it isn't discriminatory they can put whatever they want in. However whether it's enforceable is another matter and I'm not aware of any court cases that has decided this matter one way or another.

Frankly it's unwise to limit how your staff can travel to work so I assume the company will suffer in some way. It's a balancing act between upsetting the local residents or upsetting your staff and I'd imagine by default most companies would side with staff. In all honesty making travelling to work difficult would likely make me leave the job unless everything else was perfect.

I can assure you that done properly, in most instances it would be perfectly enforceable.

It is little different from having a strict dress code or a requirement for excellent personal hygiene. You can argue that no law is being broken if you go around in a grubby vest, tatty jeans and only shower once a month! However it would be completely unacceptable in many workplaces, even for backroom staff you never meet a client. Plenty of employers have very tight requirements about what their staff can and cannot wear yet don't provide a clothing allowance or uniform.

The largest employer near me has a requirement that staff live within 30 miles. They will very occasionally agree an exception when recruiting but otherwise those are the terms, take it or leave it.

Accept them or work somewhere else, that is your choice. Remember an employer can discriminate in any way they like except for the handful of reasons prohibited by law (gender, religion, orientation etc although even then there are exceptions).

Gavin83

Undervalued wrote: »

I can assure you that done properly, in most instances it would be perfectly enforceable.

Has their been any cases of someone getting fired for parking where their employer states they can't and then taking it to tribunal?

I assume you aren't debating that there hasn't been terms in employment contracts that have later been deemed unenforceable, rather just this particular term. I'd be somewhat surprised if at some point it hasn't been decided employers have no right to dictate how someone gets to work.

andygb

Undervalued wrote: »

Indeed but that is not the point at issue here.

The employer has decided, for whatever reason, that it is in the best interests of the business to prohibit their staff from parking in that road. As I have explained, with very few exceptions, they are entitled to take that course of action.

Are you then saying that the OP's employer can trump the law of the land?
I am glad that I have never worked for an employer like the OP's.
A public road is a public road, and anyone can park on it, provided no restrictions are in place.

sangie595

Gavin83 wrote: »

Has their been any cases of someone getting fired for parking where their employer states they can't and then taking it to tribunal?

I assume you aren't debating that there hasn't been terms in employment contracts that have later been deemed unenforceable, rather just this particular term. I'd be somewhat surprised if at some point it hasn't been decided employers have no right to dictate how someone gets to work.

They aren't dictating how someone gets to work. They are saying that good relations with their neighbours is important to the company, and in their book it overrides the employees rights to park in a particular area. The employees may get to work how they wish. They may park where they wish. And the employer may discipline who they wish. Just because the law says people can park on the public highway doesn't mean the employer can't dismiss. They have told the employees what they want to happen; why it is important to them; and what will happen if employees ignore them. That it quite enough to make a dismissal fair in law. Employment tribunals are not criminal courts, and employment law operates very differently to criminal law.

GreenTreen123

It!!!8217;s attitudes like the above that really !!!! me about the state of the country. Not saying !!!8220;your!!!8221; attitude is bad, it!!!8217;s appalling that a company can sack you for parking on a road. I!!!8217;m sympathetic to both sides.

martinbuckley

OP - If this company have provided you with an off site parking space, then taken if off you, but want to dictate where you can and cant park your legally taxed and insured car on the public highway, then I would suggest that unless they pay you well above what you could earn elsewhere, that this company is not one you should be working for. I am now wondering what other type of implied T&C they may have and use as an excuse to brow-beat their staff.