In this week's podcast, we explore the steps that you can take to reduce the risk of having an indirectly discriminatory provision, criterion or practice. We also discuss what to take into account when deciding whether or not indirect discrimination can be justified.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has upheld an employment tribunal decision that the claimant's assertion that his beliefs required him to take a block of five weeks' leave to attend religious festivals was not genuine.
Updated to include information on Bellman v Northampton Recruitment Ltd, a personal injury case that may have implications for discriminatory behaviour by employees towards colleagues or third parties.
In Begum v Pedagogy Auras UK Ltd t/a Barley Lane Montessori Day Nursery EAT/0309/13, the EAT upheld an employment tribunal decision that there was no religious discrimination against a Muslim interviewee who was asked by the interviewer if she could wear religious clothing that did not present a trip hazard.
The Advocate General has suggested that an employer cannot have a blanket ban on religious dress that prevents a Muslim woman from wearing an Islamic headscarf when in contact with clients.
In Pendleton v Derbyshire County Council and another  IRLR 580 EAT, the EAT held that the dismissal of an Anglican Christian teacher who refused to leave her husband, who had been convicted and sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment for making indecent images of children and voyeurism, was unfair and indirect religion or belief discrimination.
Consultant editor Darren Newman considers the Advocate General's recent opinion that it does not amount to direct religious discrimination for an employer with a policy of religious, philosophical and political neutrality to prevent a Muslim employee from wearing a hijab.
The Advocate General has said that it is not direct religious discrimination for an employer with a policy of religious and political neutrality to prevent a Muslim employee from wearing an Islamic headscarf.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that the dismissal of a Christian employee because of her refusal to end her marriage with a convicted sex offender was indirect religious discrimination.
An employer was entitled to turn down an employee's request for five consecutive weeks' annual leave in the summer to attend religious festivals with his family in Sardinia, in a useful case for employers faced with an employee asking for a long block of holiday for religious reasons.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to indirect religion or belief discrimination.