|
| |||
| |||
| | |||
|
13/01/2010 The ECJ has decided that the german fire service in its setting a maximum age limit of 30 years for entry to an 'intermediate career post' was acting legitimately within the meaning of Article 6(1) of EC Equal Treatment Framework Directive, 2000/78/EC. The ECJ decided that this was an example of a 'genuine and determining occupational requirement', and that the importance of the age factor in this particular job meant that the treatment was justified under Article 4(1) of the Directive as an example of a 'genuine and determining occupational requirement' and that this was already forseen and allowed for under the Directive. The ECJ agreed with the german government that if older applicants were recruited this would lead to a shortage of firemen able to undertake the most physically demanding duties for a sufficiently long period. The objective of maintaining operational capacity in a functioning fire service was seen by the ECJ as a legitimate objective under Article 4(1). A maximum age was therefore an 'appropriate and necessary means of achieving aims' such as to 'ensure a minimum period of service before retirement, limit the expenditure on benefits and to set up a balanced age structure within occupations'. This case may possibly have wider implications in the UK affecting services other than the emergency services. In 2009 in the case of Baker v National Air Traffice Services Ltd an employment tribunal did not accept the NATS argument that an age limit of 35 years was justifiable. This was notwithstanding NATS argument that the high costs of training needed to be recouped through a lengthy service.
|
|||
|
Some recent employment cases:- 2010 Different dress codes do not necessarily amount to sex discrimination - Dansie v. The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis [2009] UKEAT Certain conditions must exist for the obligation to carry out a risk assessment for a pregnant worker to arise - ONeill v. Buckinghamshire County Council [2010] UKEAT 2009 An employment tribunal may decide if a compromise decision is unenforcable - Industrious Ltd v Horizon Recruitment Ltd & Anor [2009] UKEAT Registrar claiming right to refuse to officiate at civil weddings loses religious discrimination case - Ladele v London Borough of Islington [2009] EWCA Civ 1357 A philosophical belief based on science is protected by the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 - Grainger Plc v Nicholson [2009] UKEAT/0219/09/ZT Christian counsellor who would not help same sex couples was not discriminated against - McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2009] UKEAT 0106_09_3011 Under TUPE the obligation to inform always applies, even when no measures are contemplated relating to the transfer - Cable Realisations Ltd v GMB Northern [2009] UKEAT The Court of Appeal rules on Harassment and 'Oppressive and Unacceptable' behaviour Veakins v Kier Islington Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1288 For s4A(3) of the DDA to apply the employer must have known (or ought to have known) that the employee was disabled and that the disability would affect him in the manner described in section 4A(1) - DWP v Alam [2009] UKEAT 0242_09_0911 A discrimination case may not proceed on the mere possibility that evidence might emerge during cross examination - ABN Amro Management Services v Hogben [2009] UKEAT 0266_09_0111 In cases of discriminatory dismissal tribunals may reduce compensation if the worker would in any event have been dismissed - Chagger v Abbey National Plc & Anor [2009] EWCA Civ 1202 It is possible to claim unfair dismissal abroad even if the workplace is registered outside the UK - Diggins v Condor Marine Crewing Services Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 1133 Autoklenz 'Subcontractors' were employees - the contractual substitution clause was just 'window dressing' - Autoclenz Ltd v Belcher & Ors [2009] EWCA Civ 1046 Contract was ultra vires but employee still able to pursue unfair dimsissal claim under ERA 96 - Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust v Lairikyengbam [2009] UKEAT 0499_08_2108 |
|||
| Do you have a problem at work? Are you being discriminated against harassed or victimised at work or have you been unfairly dismissed or wrongfully dismissed? If you are suffering from bullying victimisation or discrimination at work you need to contact WorkRep early on. Whatever your employment problem is, even if you have failed in your tribunal case and there is now a costs application against you we will try to help. click for further information about problems at work |
|||
|
Disclaimer: articles and information published by WorkRep.co.uk are for general information purposes only. Please read the site info before using this website © 2009 Workrep | |||