Updated to include information on Kratzer v R+V Allgemeine Versicherung, in which the ECJ held that a person who applies for a job with the sole purpose of making an application for compensation for discrimination is not covered by EU discrimination law.
The Brexit vote has elicited strong feelings on either side and employers need to ensure that their employees do not become victims of bullying and harassment as a result. We provide four examples of scenarios that could result in claims against employers.
Employers need to ensure that their employees do not become victims of bullying and harassment as a result of the Brexit vote. We present four examples of scenarios that might lead to claims against employers.
We discuss a number of recent cases that concern NHS employers but that could also apply more widely.
The employment tribunal held that a manager's use of bad language that included the words "Jesus Christ" and "God" did not harass a Christian employee.
In Heafield v Times Newspaper Ltd EAT/1305/12, the EAT held that there was no harassment based on religion or belief when an employee took offence at a colleague's comment using an expletive when referring to the Pope. In the context in which the remark was made, it could not reasonably be viewed as sufficiently offensive to amount to harassment.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has upheld a tribunal decision that the context of a remark is important when assessing whether or not it constituted harassment.
The context in which a potentially discriminatory remark is made can be pivotal in a harassment claim, as this unsuccessful religion or belief discrimination claim brought by a Times sub-editor shows.
The Government consults on proposals to repeal the third-party harassment provisions in the Equality Act 2010 on the basis that there is no evidence that they serve a practical purpose or are proportionate for dealing with harassment by third parties.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to harassment related to religion or belief.