0370 1500 100

Jenny Arrowsmith



Jenny has extensive experience of advising employers of all sizes. She provides strategic HR and employment law advice to clients on all aspects including redundancy and restructuring programmes, disciplinary and grievance issues, absence and performance management, contractual changes, discrimination, TUPE and restrictive covenants. She has experience of working within a range of sectors including education.

Recent highlights:

  • Conducted an audit for board of directors on a category of workers for whom their employment status was a key issue and national minimum wage issues.  
  • Advising a client whose business is reliant on tendering for services in the public sector on the employment law implications of making changes to terms and conditions of employment including changes to previously inherited TUPE terms.
  • Successfully defending a Tribunal claim brought, with union support, by a group of claimants (existing employees) who challenged the respondent’s attempts to change terms and conditions. 
  • Advising a client on a site closure and collective consultation obligations, including election of representatives and practical difficulties of needing to urgently proceed with consultations for redeployment against the requirements of collective consultation over a minimum 30 day period. 
  • Advice on the enforceability of restrictive covenants to senior executives who faced threats of litigation by their former employer and also to companies which were asserting that breaches to restrictions had occurred by former employees.
  • Defending a Tribunal claim for substantial amount of backdated holiday and claims for disability discrimination following a TUPE transfer and an employee who was employed but not known to the transferee (client). Technical arguments as to why the duty to make reasonable adjustments had not arisen.

Market View:

Jenny is listed in the Legal 500 (2012) as ‘extremely diligent’ who 'instils absolute confidence’ in clients and was again recommended in Legal 500 (2013).

Jenny qualified as a solicitor in 2002.

Read My Comments On The Latest News

  • 24/05/2019
    Court Of Appeal Rules In Favour Of Employers In Long Running Shared Parental Leave Claims

    “The Court made it clear that that there is no room for a direct, indirect or equal pay claim arising from paying women on maternity leave more than parents on shared parental leave. My client was correct to resist this claim. Its policies were similar to those of many other employers. Parliament has made a statutory exception which gives special treatment to a woman in connection with pregnancy or childbirth. That special treatment is, by definition, not available to anyone other than a birth mother, which means the partners of birth mothers are not discriminated against if they do not receive enhanced benefits for taking leave to care for their newborn. “This decision will be welcomed by employers that pay higher rates to women on maternity leave than to parents on different types of family leave. It’s also good news for women. Had the decision gone the other way, employers may have reduced their maternity pay to statutory rates because they could not afford to equalise pay rates to those taking shared parental leave – something Working Parents acknowledged in their submissions.”

    Continue Reading
  • 01/05/2018
    EAT Rules On Latest Paternity Discrimination Case

    “The issue in dispute in the case of Ali v Capita was one of direct discrimination. The issue in the case of Hextall was of whether the police’s policy of enhancing maternity pay for the first 18 weeks but only paying shared parental leave at statutory rates amounted to indirect discrimination. “Indirect discrimination occurs where a practice, criteria or provision that applies to everyone adversely impacts on a particular group. Even if this is made out, employers can attempt to justify their policy – by for example, arguing that enhancing maternity pay promotes loyalty and encourages retention. The argument here was that the rate of pay for shared parental leave is the same for both mother and father and the EAT found that it could have a disparate impact on fathers, because they (unlike mothers who can take maternity leave) have no other choice if they wish to take leave to care for their child. “This decision therefore leaves open the possibility that an indirect discrimination claim could succeed, although the employer will be able to try and justify it. The case will go back to be determined by a new employment tribunal. "Justification arguments may be, amongst other factors, influenced by the findings in the Ali v Capita case that there are health and wellbeing considerations for birth mothers in the early weeks of maternity. These issues were not raised in any detail by the EAT as they were not part of the appeal but would likely be issue in the ET case, when it is re-heard.”

    Continue Reading
  • 23/09/2016
    Legal Eagles Form Network Partnership To Boost Business Links

    “We are delighted to partner with the Yorkshire Enterprise Network and look forward to working with its members to help support them and develop their businesses.”

    Continue Reading
  • 22/04/2016
    Bike Couriers Fight For Employer's Rights

    “We have seen an increase in the numbers of cases being brought by individuals engaged on self-employed contracts seeking to challenge their status in order to obtain valuable employment rights, such as the right to paid holiday and receive the national minimum wage rates etc. These often involve vulnerable workers in fairly low paid jobs. “The rights of these couriers will be determined by reference to the reality of their working relationship and not by what is set out in a written agreement. Employment tribunals and courts can set aside express contractual terms which are inconsistent with the reality of the relationship of the parties.er “A few years ago, the Supreme Court examined the status of a group of car valets engaged on self-employed basis and found that they were, in fact, workers. It said that individuals may be considered by HMRC to be self-employed for tax purposes, but they can still be considered to be workers and obtain employment protection.

    Continue Reading

Send Us Your Enquiry

Enter your details below and one of our experts will call you back as soon as possible.

This data will only be used by Irwin Mitchell for processing your query and for no other purpose.

© 2019 Irwin Mitchell LLP is Authorised & Regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Our Regulatory Information.