Employment Law Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Employment Law - Case Study exerciseThe 2004 Regulations clearly state that it is unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person . . . on the grounds of religious principle. The exact nature of religious legal opinion was much debated in the drafting of the Act, but it was apparently unploughed deliberately vague in order to cover as many cases as possible. If the religious belief directly effects a persons performance on the chore (or lack thereof) then it would appear that an employer cannot be held liable for discrimination if the employee is fired.Two recent cases are very relevant to Sandeeps possible action. In Hazmi vs. Headfield church of England Junior School a recent employment tribunal dismissed three claims of discrimination and curse on religious grounds made by a Muslim woman, Aishah Azmi, who refused to unpack her veil in the classroom. The school she was reaching ofr sacked herThe main thrust of Azmis argument was that she was prepared and even wil ling to remove her veil in front of children, but not when male colleagues were present. The tribunal agreed that she had been victimized, but disagreed with her early(a) claims. It said that her sacking was legitimate.Another case, Eweida vs. British Airways involves company policies regarding a dress code. Naida Eweida is a devout Catholic who wore a crucifix pendant on her uniform. British Airways asked her to remove it if she wanted to work in the sign in area, but she refused. The airline offered Eweida a job behind the scenes. She again refused. Eweida lost two levels of appeals against her sacking, but British Airways has since changed its dress code policy to allow the wearing of crosses. This case has yet to be fully resolved. Advice to SandeepHe could bring a case for discrimination based on the 2004 Act, but ethical obligations would require me to aim him that he would be unlikely to win the case. First, the problem of whether his cult would be regarded as a accepted religion for the provisions of the Act to take place would be a problem. Second, the wearing of pink, long copper and an earring would clearly interfere with his ability to conduct business as a salesman. This is a legitimate business enterprise of his company and it would probably be irrelevant whether his attire was based upon his religion/cult beliefs or not. The accompaniment is that he could not function as a successful salesman because of his clothing beliefs. Sandeep should ask for a job within the same company that does not require contact with the public/customers. If the company refuses to rehire him under these offset (assuming there are jobs for which Sandeep is qualified) then a discrimination suit might be brought. Mike, who works as a receptionist and porter, was diagnosed as suffering from osteoarthritis two years ago. He has never told anyone at work slightly this. However, his condition is getting worse and it is taking him increasing amounts of time to carry out the portering part of his job. The Head of Customer Relations complains about Mike to Phil, who is Mikes line manager and Phil institutes disciplinary proceedings against Mike. licit PrinciplesThe major legal principle here is whether Mike is being discriminated against because of a disability. The fact that he has told no-one about his condition, which is disabling him, makes any chance of winning his case rather remote.The Law Under the Disability favoritism Act of 1995 it is unlawful to