Question 1
Difficulty: easy
How do you stay current with changes in employment law, and how do you apply new developments in your day-to-day practice?
Sample answer
I treat staying current as part of the job, not something separate from it. I follow legislative updates, tribunal and court decisions, regulator guidance, and commentary from trusted professional bodies, but I’m careful not to rely on headlines alone. I like to understand how a change will affect real client decisions, such as drafting, investigations, disciplinary processes, redundancy plans, or settlement strategy. In practice, I usually translate a legal update into a short internal note: what changed, what the risk is, and what clients should do differently. For example, if there is a shift in how a tribunal is approaching whistleblowing or flexible working, I’ll think through how that changes advice on process, documentation, and timing. I also value discussing developments with colleagues because it helps test assumptions and keeps advice practical rather than overly academic. That combination of research and application helps me give clients clear, usable guidance.
Question 2
Difficulty: medium
Tell me about a time you advised a client through a difficult employee relations issue. What was your approach?
Sample answer
In a previous matter, a client came to me after a long-running conflict between a manager and a senior employee had started affecting the wider team. There were concerns about conduct, but also signs that the process could easily become personal and messy. My approach was to slow things down and focus on structure. First, I helped the client separate the underlying performance and behaviour concerns from the interpersonal tension. Then I mapped out the procedural steps, making sure they had a fair investigation, clear allegations, and proper documentation before any decision was made. I also coached them on communication, because tone matters a lot in these situations. The goal was to reduce risk without making the process feel defensive or punitive. In the end, the matter was resolved without litigation, and the client was able to reset the working relationship and improve their internal process for similar cases going forward.
Question 3
Difficulty: hard
How would you handle a discrimination complaint that appears weak on the facts but is emotionally charged and politically sensitive for the client?
Sample answer
I would start by treating it seriously, even if the facts initially look weak. In discrimination matters, perception, process, and documentation are just as important as the final legal view. I’d first make sure the complaint is properly acknowledged and that any immediate risk is managed, including preserving evidence and considering whether interim steps are needed. Then I’d look at the specific allegation, the comparator evidence, and any patterns in treatment or comments that could create risk. At the same time, I’d help the client avoid reacting defensively or dismissively, because that can escalate the issue and damage trust. I’d give them a balanced assessment: where the legal risks are low, where there may still be reputational or employee-relations exposure, and what an appropriate response looks like. If the complaint is not upheld, I’d still advise on how to communicate the outcome respectfully and whether broader management or training issues need attention.
Question 4
Difficulty: medium
What is your approach to advising on redundancies to reduce the risk of unfair dismissal claims?
Sample answer
My approach is to focus on process, consistency, and evidence from the outset. A lawful redundancy exercise is rarely about one single decision; it’s about building a fair framework that can withstand scrutiny. I would first confirm that there is a genuine redundancy situation and that the business rationale is clearly documented. Then I’d work through the selection pool, selection criteria, consultation plan, and alternatives to redundancy, including suitable alternative employment. I pay close attention to whether the criteria are objective and applied consistently, because that is often where claims arise. I also make sure consultation is genuine rather than box-ticking, with enough time for employees to respond and propose alternatives. If collective consultation applies, I’d flag those obligations early because missing them can create significant exposure. I’m also practical about commercial realities: the best advice is one that protects legal position without making restructuring impossible. That balance is important to clients.
Question 5
Difficulty: hard
Describe how you would manage a case involving whistleblowing allegations and a related grievance raised by the same employee.
Sample answer
I would handle that very carefully because whistleblowing issues often become high-risk quickly, especially when the employee is also raising a grievance. My first step would be to identify exactly what disclosures were made, to whom, and whether they potentially qualify as protected disclosures. Then I would separate the whistleblowing analysis from the grievance process, while making sure they are coordinated rather than handled in silos. That means protecting confidentiality where possible, avoiding any action that could look retaliatory, and ensuring the employee is not disadvantaged because they raised concerns. I’d also advise the client to keep a tight record of decision-making, especially if any management action is already under way. On the grievance side, I’d ensure it is investigated fairly and independently. Where possible, I’d help the client address the underlying concern quickly, because a timely and credible response can reduce escalation. The key is to stay objective, structured, and alert to retaliation risk throughout.
Question 6
Difficulty: easy
How do you balance giving firm legal advice with maintaining a strong client relationship?
Sample answer
I think the best client relationships are built on honesty, clarity, and consistency. Clients do not usually want the most cautious answer in theory; they want a clear view of risk and a practical path forward. So I try to be direct about where the legal position is strong, where it is uncertain, and what the likely consequences are if they choose a particular route. At the same time, I avoid giving advice in a way that feels detached or judgmental. Employment issues can be stressful and politically sensitive, especially for HR teams and business leaders, so tone matters. I also make a point of understanding the client’s commercial and cultural context before making recommendations. That helps me tailor advice rather than delivering a one-size-fits-all answer. If I think a client is heading toward avoidable risk, I’ll say so plainly, but I’ll also offer alternatives. I’ve found that clients appreciate candour when it is paired with practical support.
Question 7
Difficulty: medium
What would you do if a client wanted to dismiss an employee immediately, but you believed the process was likely unfair?
Sample answer
I would be honest and specific about the risk rather than giving a vague warning. I’d explain what facts are missing, what process would normally be expected, and what the likely exposure could be if they move too quickly. Then I’d ask why they want immediate action, because sometimes there is an urgent concern such as misconduct, safety, or serious breakdown in trust that can be managed in another way. If there is a genuine need to remove the employee from the workplace, I’d discuss alternatives like suspension, temporary reassignment, or a carefully handled investigatory process. I’d also look at whether the employer already has enough evidence to support dismissal or whether further steps are needed. My goal would be to help them achieve the business objective without creating unnecessary liability. If they still chose a risky route after being properly advised, I would make sure my advice was clearly documented so there is a record of the concerns and the reasons given.
Question 8
Difficulty: hard
How do you approach drafting or reviewing employment contracts and policies for a client with operations in multiple jurisdictions?
Sample answer
For multi-jurisdiction clients, I start by separating the non-negotiables from the local variations. The client often wants one consistent framework, but employment law rarely works that neatly across borders. I’d first understand the business model, the locations involved, and whether the documents need to work as group-wide standards or as local employment terms. Then I’d identify which provisions need careful localisation, such as termination rights, working time, data protection, benefits, post-termination restrictions, or disciplinary procedure. I also check that the wording is not only legally sound but operationally usable for HR teams. A contract that is technically fine but impossible to administer creates problems later. I like to use plain, direct drafting wherever possible, because that reduces misunderstandings and makes enforcement easier. For policies, I focus on consistency in core principles while allowing local annexes where the law requires it. The aim is to give the business a coherent structure without creating hidden compliance risks.
Question 9
Difficulty: easy
Tell me about a time you had to manage a high-pressure deadline while maintaining accuracy and client service.
Sample answer
Employment law often moves quickly, and I’ve learned that pressure is manageable if you are disciplined. In one matter, I had to advise on a live disciplinary process while also preparing documentation for a separate tribunal deadline. Both were important, and the client needed fast answers. I started by prioritising the work based on legal risk and external deadlines, then I broke each task into smaller steps so nothing got lost. I also communicated early with the client about timing and what I could deliver first, because uncertainty is usually more stressful than a realistic schedule. Rather than trying to do everything at once, I focused on getting the key legal points right and then refining the detail. I also used checklists and a final quality pass to avoid mistakes. The result was that both matters were handled on time, and the client appreciated the steady communication. For me, good service under pressure means being calm, organised, and transparent.
Question 10
Difficulty: medium
How would you advise an employer who wants to restrict a departing employee from joining a competitor?
Sample answer
I would begin by reviewing the contract and any restrictive covenants to see what is actually in place and whether it is likely to be enforceable. In my experience, employers often assume that a clause will protect them, but enforceability depends on whether the restriction goes no further than reasonably necessary to protect a legitimate business interest. I’d look at the employee’s role, access to confidential information, customer relationships, and the scope of the restriction in terms of time, geography, and activity. If the wording is too broad, I’d advise against relying on it without considering the risk of challenge. I’d also explore whether there are other practical protections, such as garden leave, confidentiality obligations, or a well-managed handover. If there is a real concern about misuse of information, I’d advise quickly and carefully on evidence preservation and any urgent steps. The objective is to protect the business in a way that is legally defensible, not just aggressive on paper.
