October

New legislation has come into force to increase penalties for employers who take on illegal migrant workers. The Immigration Act 2016 makes it easier to hold bosses accountable for taking on illegal migrant workers, giving courts the power to impose a fine of up to ?20,000 and a prison sentence of up to five years for businesses and individuals who fall foul of the new law.

It also includes an additional power to shut a business down for 48 hours if an employer is found to have persistently broken the law. So how do you protect yourself and your business? How to prevent legal migrant workers being affected by false claims that cause stress and affect productivity? And how do you avoid allegations that checks are discriminatory?

"More than 13,000 foreign criminals are awaiting deportation from the UK, including thousands of European citizens, according to a report by MPs, which warns that the failure to remove a population ""the size of a small town"" could undermine public confidence in the UK 's EU membership.

In findings that were immediately seized upon by Brexit campaigners, the Home Affairs Select Committee said that ""clear inefficiencies"" in the process of sending foreign national offenders (FNOs) back to fellow EU member states would lead people to ""question the point of the UK remaining a member of the EU"". While the pace of removals has increased in recent years, committee chair Keith Vaz, who supports a Remain vote, said that the Home Office should have done better. While the majority of FNOs in the UK are in prisons, nearly 6,000 were living in communities at the end of 2015, the report said. Of the predominant nationalities among FNOs, the top three were all EU countries: Poland, Ireland and Romania."

Andrea Leadsom, who is in the running to be the UK 's next prime minister, has come under criticism after a CV was published that allegedly exaggerated some of her previous roles.

This is yet another instance of a high profile public figure coming under scrutiny for possible CV embellishments, serving as a warning to HR to properly screen all candidates during the recruitment process. This case serves as a warning to HR that even people in society 's higher echelons can possibly alter their resumes, putting a real onus on firms to conduct background checks on all applicants.