April 2009
People Management;4/9/2009, Vol. 15 Issue 8, p39
This section offers news briefs concerning labor laws in Great Britain as of April 9, 2009. The government introduced new rights to flexible working. A court allowed an employee who claims he was discriminated against on the grounds of his environmental views to pursue his claim of unfair dismissal. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that the Sheffield County Council did not discriminate by paying male gardeners more than female carers.


Related Articles

  • The legal lowdown. Farrell, Lewina // Recruiter;Feb2014, Special section p6 

    This section offers news briefs concerning British labor laws as of February 2014. The British Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has rejected the argument of the claimants in the case Moran and others v. Ideal Cleaning that, being agency workers, they are entitled to equal treatment under the...

  • IN BRIEF.  // Employers Law;Jun2008, p8 

    The article focuses on the rulings on employment-related cases in Great Britain. In Forces One Utilities versus Hatfield, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) held that it is appropriate to strike out a response when the employer's main witness threatens the claimant at the tribunal. In Kuzel...

  • Can cost justify age discrimination?  // Credit Management;Feb2011, p38 

    The article focuses on the issue addressed by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) related to the Woodcock v. Cumbria Primary Care Trust (PCT) case in Great Britain, in which Mr. Woodcock claims for age discrimination following the dismissal from the company and payment of the 12 month period...

  • EBR Attridge Law LLP (formerly Attridge Law) and anor v Coleman.  // Employers Law;Dec2009/Jan2010, p9 

    The article discusses a court case wherein the British Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled that a claim may be filed by employees being discriminated or harassed due to their association with a disabled person. In EBR Attridge Law LLP (formerly Attridge Law) and Anor v. Coleman, EBR Attridge Law...

  • Kirklees Metropolitan Council v Radecki.  // Employers Law;Jun2009, p8 

    The article discusses the appellate case Kirklees Metropolitan Council versus Radecki in England in which the appellant brought unfailr dismissal claim. Radecki and the council failed to reach a binding agreement and he was terminated on October 31, 2006. The tribunal rejected the unfair...

  • LEGAL CHECKLIST.  // People Management;5/21/2009, Vol. 15 Issue 11, p35 

    The article discusses several court cases related to labor in Great Britain. In Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary v Adams, the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) ruled that night work can be considered a normal day-to-day activity, in relation to an employee's disability discrimination claim. In...

  • in brief.  // Employers Law;Mar2004, p21 

    Presents updates on Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decisions in Great Britain as of March 2004. Ruling of the EAT on the case of an employee who filed claims of an unfair dismissal against his employer due to whistleblowing; Decision of the EAT regarding the liability of a company for a race...

  • Case round-up. Dempsey, Karen // Personnel Today;6/28/2005, p10 

    The article focuses on a case in which an employee, following her dismissal, brought a sex discrimination claim against both the company and against the managing director, personally. The British Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld her complaints against both parties and determined that the real...

  • Sex discrimination and pregnancy.  // Accountancy;Aug1985, Vol. 96 Issue 1104, p34 

    This article examines a decision of the British Employment Appeal Tribunal in Turley v. Allders Department Stores Ltd. which held that dismissal for pregnancy was not capable of constituting sex discrimination. The Tribunal affirms that it could not be direct discrimination under the Sex...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics