Requirement to cover for job--share partner not justifiable
Article Abstract:
In Golding v Honda of the UK Manufacturing Ltd., a Bristol employment tribunal upheld that a company that required an employee to work shift patterns and to cover for a job-share partner's absences was unlawful indirect sex discrimination.
Publication Name: Equal Opportunities Review
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 0268-7143
Year: 2004
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Indirectly discriminatory rule more to do with rank and status than operational effectiveness
Article Abstract:
In McGarr v Ministry of Defence, a London South employment tribunal upheld that preventing a woman army officer from being released on duty for part-time judicial office by colonies or above was subjected to indirect sex discrimination.
Publication Name: Equal Opportunities Review
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 0268-7143
Year: 2004
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Enlargement transforms EU labour market. Focus on labour market strategy. Autumn bargaining under way
- Abstracts: No evidence of disproportionate impact. No justification for requiring five-day week. Refusal of three-day week justified
- Abstracts: 175,000 pounds sterling compensation for indirect sex discrimination. Risk of inefficiency does not outweigh discrimination in refusing flexible working
- Abstracts: 120,545 pounds sterling compensation where victim of sex discrimination suffers major depressive disorder