Considering whether substantial effects are likely to (could well) last at least 12 months or recur. Diana Kloss reviews cases holding that whether substantial effects could well be ‘long-term’ under the Equality Act must be considered as at the time of the alleged discrimination, and considers implications for OH reports. Read the full blog: Assessing... Read more »
An employment tribunal has upheld the Equality Act claim of a claimant describing herself as ‘non-binary’ and ‘gender-fluid’. Although only an employment tribunal decision and so not a binding precedent, a tribunal has held that non-binary or gender-fluid people can be protected under the protected characteristic of ‘gender reassignment’ – that the person does not... Read more »
Diana Kloss’s latest blog discusses the EAT decision in Elliott v Dorset County Council, which overturned a tribunal decision that the claimant’s Asperger’s Syndrome did not have a ‘substantial’ effect. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the tribunal had given too much weight to wording in the Guidance on definition of disability, and not enough... Read more »
The EAT upheld a claim of direct pregnancy discrimination where a risk assessment had decided that the claimant could stay in her current role with adjustments, but senior management decided to move her elsewhere. The claimant, a police officer, was a response officer on the front line, which was the job she had always wanted.... Read more »
The Supreme Court considered how far sleep-in care sector workers were entitled to the national minimum wage. The court in Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake (bailii.org) held that sleep-in care sector workers who were expected to sleep but might need to answer emergency calls during the night were not entitled to the minimum wage while asleep.... Read more »
The Government has issued draft regulations to extend to ‘workers’ protection for taking steps in response to danger. This is to implement part of a High Court decision from last November (which also relates to PPE). In November 2020 the High Court held that EU directives require legal protection to extend to ‘workers’, not just... Read more »
The Supreme Court has issued a far-reaching decision on how to determine whether an individual is protected by employment legislation. The question was whether Uber drivers were ‘workers’, so as to have rights against Uber to the national minimum wage, paid holiday, and whistleblowing protection. Uber argued that drivers contracted directly with passengers, with Uber... Read more »
Under Lockdown 3 regulations from 6th January, in England people can only leave home for work purposes if it is not reasonably possible to work from home. Up to 5th January that was the legal position in Tier 4. In other Tiers the guidance was that everyone who can work from home should do so.... Read more »
From 1st January 2021, EU law is incorporated into UK law but with the UK free to amend it, subject to any agreement to the contrary. Previously the UK remained bound by EU law during an ‘implementation period’ lasting until 31st December 2020. Even after that date though, for the time being the UK courts... Read more »
Diana Kloss’s latest blog reports on a case which has held that legal protections on PPE and leaving work in circumstances of danger should apply to ‘workers’, not just employees. The Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB) was successful in its claim that UK legislation failed to implement EU directives requiring that protection should... Read more »
