Discrimination Law – A Simple Guide

The question of discrimination can be confusing, however it is important that employers are aware of the legalities, or else they risk finding themselves at the centre of an expensive court case. Listed here are the key areas where discrimination can take place, and how to make sure you don’t fall foul of the law.

Age

The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations, which came into force on 1 October 2006, aim to achieve equal treatment in employment and vocational training to eradicate discrimination on the grounds of age.

It is unlawful to make employment decisions based on a person’s age. Retirement ages below 65 are unlawful unless they can be objectively justified.

This employment legislation also removes the upper age limits for unfair dismissal rights and statutory redundancy payments. Having a compulsory retirement age of 65 or over is not age discrimination, but you must make sure that you follow new statutory procedures. These include giving employees at least six months’ notice of their intended date of retirement and notifying them that they have the right to request to continue working beyond either the default retirement age or the normal retirement age set by the employer. Employers have a duty to consider such a request. It is therefore important to be aware of forthcoming retirements and to have the necessary systems in place for notifying employees and dealing with requests to continue working.

Create an age profile of existing staff so that you can plan for retirements. This can also be used to aid your recruitment policy, rectifying any obvious age imbalance in the workforce, and to ensure that equal access is given to training and other opportunities.
 Disability Under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA), it is unlawful for employers to treat a disabled person less favourably than they would a non-disabled person or someone without that particular disability, unless it can be demonstrated that the treatment in question is justified. The DDA also states that employers must make reasonable alterations to the physical working environment and working conditions of any disabled employees so that they are not disadvantaged by their needs. The definition of ‘disability’ is a bit wider than you would think.

Sex

The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 outlaws discriminatory practices on grounds of sex in connection with recruitment, promotion, dismissal and access to benefits, services or facilities. In addition, there is a specific prohibition against harassment, sexual harassment and conduct of a sexual nature. The Equal Pay Act 1970 gives protection against discriminatory terms and conditions of employment, particularly pay and eligibility for pension scheme membership, where the difference is on the grounds of sex.

Race

The Race Relations Act 1976 makes it unlawful to discriminate against an employee because of their colour, race, nationality, ethnic or national origins. Where a prima facie case is established that the employer’s conduct is discriminatory, it is then up to them to demonstrate that it is not. Sometimes, what may appear to be a non-discriminatory requirement or condition, which applies equally to everyone, can be indirectly discriminatory. This could be because it can only be met by a smaller proportion of people that belong to a specific racial group.

Sexual Orientation

Discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in an employment or vocational context is unlawful under The Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003.

The employment law status of a civil partner under the Regulations is comparable with that of a spouse. A civil partner who is treated less favourably than a married person in similar circumstances can bring a claim for sexual orientation discrimination. It is also unlawful to discriminate against transsexuals under the Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations 1999.

Religion or Belief

Discrimination on grounds of religion or belief in an employment or vocational context is unlawful under The Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003. It is important for employers to be aware of the requirements of an employee’s religion in order to ensure that employment policies and practices, even though they apply to all employees, do not put an individual member of staff at a particular disadvantage. Failure to allow employees to take time off for religious holidays and festivals can be classed as indirect discrimination.

There is no upper limit to the amount that can be awarded to claimants in discrimination cases.

In addition, recent employment law cases have seen employers found vicariously liable, under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, for bullying and harassment of one employee by another in the workplace where there is a sufficiently clear link between the work and the harassment. It is important to have in place a strict equal treatment policy, but merely having a policy is not enough to comply with the law. You must take positive action that will enforce it and get rid of any behaviour from other employees that could cause anxiety or distress. Any incidence of such behaviour must be dealt with at once to the satisfaction of the alleged victim.

With unlimited amounts that can be awarded for successful discrimination cases in the employment tribunal, every employer should make sure that their policies and practice a lot discriminate for you anyway.

If faced with a discrimination problem, employers should always seek legal advice from a solicitor specialising in employment law discrimination.

————————

Bonallack & Bishop are a firm of specialist Discrimination Solicitors (http://www.bishopslaw.co.uk ) with a team experienced in Disability Discrimination Law. Senior Partner Tim Bishop is responsible for all major strategic decisions and has grown the firm by 1000% in 12 years. He has strong plans for its continued expansion and considers himself a businessman who owns a law firm.

Source: http://www.submityourarticle.com/a.php?a=86814

Mesothelioma Cases Continue to Rise Worldwide

Recent reports in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada have indicated that the annual number of mesothelioma deaths is increasing. Mesothelioma is a rare but deadly form of lung cancer related to asbestos exposure. Exposure is often result of working in an industry, such as the insulation or automotive, which uses asbestos in manufacture or production. Because mesothelioma usually manifests 20 to 40 years after the first exposure, many reported cases derive from asbestos exposure that occurred in the 1960s and 1970s.

According to calculations by the Center for Disease Control, mesothelioma deaths are expected to peak around 2010 in the United States whereas in the United Kingdom, the Health and Safety Executive predicted mesothelioma cases would continue to rise until 2016. The Canadian government reported mesothelioma cases shot up 67 percent in the last 15 years. The number of mesothelioma cases amoung women is reported to rise as well, despite that men are more likely to develop the cancer.
Continue reading article »

Discrimination and wrongful termination

Here we are looking at the seven characteristics that can give rise to an accusation of discrimination against an employer. These are age, race, sex, religion, national origin, disability or pregnancy. The definition of disability is looked at in our article on “Disability – no reason for discrimination or termination”. The rest of the seven characteristics are more clear-cut and easy to understand.

The major turning points for an employee’s career can be seen as promotion, job assignment, termination and wage increases. Job assignment is the most difficult one to look at and control. It would be difficult to ignore that an employee, or employee’s partner, is due to give birth at a time which is crucial for the completion of a project. This is especially true when considering which people should be assigned to any project. The same could be said of someone who is due to have major surgery which is planned to take place at a crucial time in the project. However, such considerations can be construed as illegal and care must be exercised, remembering the fact of the birth, does not become an illegal reason to choose someone else to work on any project or to have any given role in the company.
Continue reading article »

Family and Medical Leave (Act)

On the surface it looks so simple, but at its heart there is a great deal of complexity that can cause problems for the unsuspecting employer or employee and cost thousands of dollars in compensation for the employer or the employee could lose their job.

The first limitation on the FMLA for employees to notice is that is does not apply to small employers or small work locations. If the employer has less than 50 employees within 75 miles of the employee’s workplace, then the act is not relevant. However, if the employer is relocating an office then it may have a considerable bearing. Consider when an employer has two offices, each with 25 employees and 80 miles apart this business does not come under the terms of the act. However if one of the offices moves making it less than 75 miles apart, then it falls under the act. This is a simple example, but you should consider a company with 5 or 6 teams of 25 people who are moving from one site to another in West Virginia, they could easily fall in and out of the act. It would be possible for an attorney to claim they would always be within the act.
Continue reading article »

Residents Near Asbestos Plant at 26 Times Greater Risk of Mesothelioma, Study Says

By Wade Rawlins
Asbestos is among the most thoroughly investigated of any workplace health hazard. Yet, certain questions still intrigue researchers including the relative potencies of different types of asbestos, the role of fiber size in determining toxicity and the workplace hazards of unregulated mineral fibers that mimic asbestos. But should these questions be a barrier to a national ban on asbestos use?

Researchers at the University of Washington, the U.S. Public Health Service and the Center for Construction Research and Training, argue in the current issue of the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, that unanswered questions about asbestos should not stand in the way of more protective occupational health policy.
Continue reading article »