Discrimination and Employment Law
Employment laws offer protection to workers who have been treated in an unethical way. Some employers may indulge staffs unfairly based on their religion, national origin, gender, race, and disability. Broadly speaking, modern organizations use both voluntary and legal measures to regulate the working relationship between the managers and workforces. Therefore, occupational laws are the important organizational component that businesses use to restrain the unfettered exercise of the managers and corporate leaders.[1] Moreover, in the case of work termination, through the employment laws, one can gather sufficient evidence to identify the aspect of unfair conduct to the legal organizations set to rule on cases pertaining discrimination practices within the employment system.[2] As such, based on the case study of RAXII Limited, this paper reviews some of the discriminating actions that employers conduct as part of employment tasks. For a detailed discussion, this paper will present the application of Equity Act 2010 to different employment situations and how the Act can be employed to solve the cases happening at RAXII Limited.
Employees Dismissal
According to the employment law, if an employee is terminated from his or her duty in an outlawed manner, one is likely to acquire compensation or an award for damages that occurs from the dismissal decisions.[3] In the case of RAXII restaurant, Terry is sacked after alluding that he dissatisfied with the suppliers of the foodstuffs. Terry has worked at RAXII Limited for eighteen months, and therefore, through legal procedures, he can seek for damage compensation. From the understanding of employment law, Terry has potential claims against the firm, and if he brings the case to the industrial tribunal, the company will likely pay him the damage money and make any other compensation that the tribunal will quote according to the type of claim presented. With no doubt, it is evident that the dismissal of Terry was motivated by conduct related to ethics in the line of work and it is a fact that RAXII restaurant as the employer did not have legitimate business justification for the dismissal. However, for an employee to bring his claims to the tribunal, it will be significant for him or her to consider whether the employer had a valid reason for the termination practice.[4] Hence, Terry can claim that his termination was harsh, unjust, and unreasonable, as the employer does not have a valid reason behind the decision to dismiss Terry from his duties.
The issue of whether there was a valid reason for Terry’s dismissal is relevant to consider before highlighting if Terry can actually present a claim against the firm. Essentially, because terry was not given a lawful reason for termination, his can use this as an object to make his claim defensible and a claim that is well founded or based on evidence to show that the employer action was discriminating.[5] Besides, Terry was not notified for the reason why he was sacked, and this makes it clear that the employer was unfair, unjust, and harsh with the decision to terminate Terry’s contract. Apparently, this is enough reason for Terry to bring the claims to the state industrial tribunal, as the employment law proclaims that employees should be given a briefing on substantive matters that led to their contract dismissal.[6] Consistently, for Terry’s case, unfair dismissal laws will apply if the employee has been dismissed for other reason apart from genuine redundancy.[7] For the case of Terry, the employer motive is not to reduce the number of employees working in the restaurant, but the motive is to sack Terry because he raised an issue relating to the suppliers and the material being supplied to the hotel. Terry can use the employer’s motive as another reason to make his claim stronger and justifiable when the matter is brought in front of the employment tribunal.[8] This implies that for Terry to make claims that feature the aspect of unfair dismissal, he should be in a good position to show that the reasons for dismissal were not related to his work, but the reasons were void and unreasonable as there was no briefing that was made before termination.
Claims under Equity Act 2010
In the United Kingdom, the Equality Act 2010 is an important legal binding deed that gives the employers an obligation of ensuring that employees within the workplace are not underrepresented.[9] On the other hand, since the implementation of Equality Act 2010, a number legislation relating to work among them being Sex Discrimination Act (SDA), the 1976 Race Relation Act (RRA), Disability Act 1995, were being strengthened and replaced with an act that is efficient.[10] Importantly, the Equality Act 2010 also replaced several regulations that have been used as employment discrimination laws in the areas of age, employee’s religion or belief, and sexual orientation. Scholarly evidence shows that for the first time, all characteristics protected from discrimination in the UK are distilled in one Act, which is assisting employers to deter cases of discrimination at the workplaces (Odeku, Kola 4696).[11]
From the understanding of the Equality Act 2010, it is evident that employees can use the Act to peruse any claim that may involve discriminating issues at the workplace. For instance, in the case of RAXII Company, Marie and Sonia can relate to the Equality Act 2010 in order to bring discrimination claims under different grounds suggesting that the company was in one way or the other discriminative to them. Arguably, from the case presentation, it is clear that the two employees may feel pressurized and insecure with the company’s demand. Section 4 of the Equality Act 2010 lists a number of protected characteristics with which the employees can use to bring claims to the industrial tribunals.[12]
As the company ordered Sonia to do something that is against her religion, this is an indication of religious discrimination, which is regulated by the Equality Act 2010.[13] For this reason, Sonia a Christian employee working at RAXII Limited can use the Act to bring a discrimination claim. The Act suggests that religious employees with clear religious structure and belief system should be viewed as people who are different from the others.[14] In addition, employers should not use their power to regulate an employee or order employees to abandon their religious beliefs or even adapt other religious beliefs that are contrary to their religious system.[15]
Furthermore, the Equality Act 2010 also provide employees in the UK with the possibility of bringing claims for direct discrimination such as employers demanded female workers to change their dressing code so that they can promote the image of the company. In the First Joint Report of Session 2016-2017, it is argued that the UK government is aware of the fact that some of the organizations are highly purporting discriminatory dress codes. Consequently, the UK government has ordered the employers to change the behavior by complying with the Equality Act 2010.[16] Although the many employers and employees in the UK fail to understand the relationship between the Equality Act 2010 and workplace dress code, the government has shown its effort on promoting the advantages of the Act when it comes to dealing with the matter of approaching gender discrimination issues.[17] Equally, the discrimination under dress code category within the workplace can be placed under the gender discrimination concepts in terms of the Equality Act 2010 characteristics. Through the Act, Marie can bring claims for discrimination assaults, as the Act fully protects workers against dress code discrimination.
The Application of the Equality Act 2010 to Viv, Don, and Igor Situations
From the case study, more employees appear to encounter discrimination under different categories. Viv, an experienced employee, is seeking promotion, but the manager told her that she is excessively young for a Chef Executive post. Notably, this statement shows the aspect of age discrimination within the company. Age discrimination happens across a specific age range, which means that it can happen to people at a younger age and older age, especially people between 25 and 50 years.[18] Report from the CIPD shows that in the UK, age discrimination has increased, with 59% of the respondents who were involved in the survey by the CIPD affirming that have encountered age discrimination at issue.[19] However, the Equality Act 2010 that was passed on 8 April 2010 has been helpful to employees who encounters age discrimination, as the act is used by the UK government to harmonize age and other forms of discriminations. Thus, going back to the case of Viv and her age discrimination issue, through the Equality Act 2010, the employee can bring a claim to the employment tribunals, as the Act intends to support and regulate equality within the workplace.[20] The Equality Act 2010 elaborates the law of discrimination by justifying that when an employee is treated unlawfully due to his or her age, this is a direct discrimination with regard to the employment law.[21] To a better understanding, Viv can use the Act to proclaim age discrimination, as it is evident the manager at RAXII is favoring some employees while not showing justifiable reasons for other employees and why they are not given equal chances regardless of their experience and qualifications.
Don, a job applicant at RAXII is also a victim of discrimination. From the case study, Don is presented as an individual with albinism, which makes him a vulnerable individual. The latest statistics from the Employment Tribunal Services demonstrate that in the UK, the cases of discrimination on the ground of disability increased in the year 2009 and 2010 comprehensively.[22] From the statistics, it is apparent that disability discrimination has a become issue within the UK’s working sector. The Equality Act 2010 allows claims to be brought in relation issue of unfavorable treatment, due to the aspect of disability or vulnerability of a person.[23] The Act also provides duties for employers to make a reasonable adjustment for disabled people, as a way of stopping the discrimination that may happen on the ground of disability, just like the case of Don and RAXII Company.[24] The relationship between the Equality Act 2010 and Don’s case is clear, and thus, the act can apply to Don’s situation in demand for work equality and fairness.
Similarly, the Equality Act 2010 can apply to Igor’s situation, as the act allows employees to bring claims to the industrial tribunals if they are discriminated indirectly. From Igor’s case, the act of indirect discrimination can be identified, as the employee is at a particular disadvantage situation when compared to the situation of other people.[25] Additionally, if an employer restricts an applicant to get the job regardless of the qualification he or she have, this is likely to be viewed as a discrimination action to the applicant against work.[26] This means that when the RAXII refuses to employ Igor because he is not handsome, Igor becomes a victim of unfairness employment, which according to the Equality Act 2010 is an indirect form of discrimination. Igor can apply the Equality Act 2010 to bring his case to the court tribunal, as indirect discrimination is one of the foremost characteristic of the 2010 statute.[27] As such, the Act prohibits conduct such as failing to hire a person because of his or her facial appearance. As the Act focuses on making the employers comply with the employment laws, Igor can apply the Act to his situation in various ways. For example, Igor can justifiably show that the employer did not work according to the Act’s adjustments, which says that every staff applying for a job should be hired fairly under any circumstances and despite what his or her appearance presents.[28]
In essence, it is necessary to say that although it is not possible to achieve perfect equality within the workplace, policymakers and employers in the UK should make an effort to prevent unjust and unreasonable treatment of UK workers. This paper presents both direct and indirect discrimination cases as it has happened to different employees at RAXII restaurant. The discussion shows that the Equality Act 2010 plays a vital role in harnessing the function of management through controlling and organizing the workforces, managing the exercise of power in the workplace, and administering the conflict of interest within the organizations. More importantly, the UK employers should emulate the government effort to reduce discrimination on the entire working sector, as this will promote employees welfare and the well-being of the workforce sector in the UK.
Bibliography
Butler, Mark. Equality and Anti-Discrimination Law: The Equality Act 2010 and Other Anti-Discrimination Protections. (SPL 2016).
Cabrelli, David A. Employment Law in Context: Text and Materials. (OUP 2016).
Chapman, Anna. “Protections in Relation to Dismissal: From the Workplace Relations Act to the Fair Work Act.” (2009) ULJ 32.
Collins, Hugh. Employment Law, (OUP 2010).
Davies, Alex. Workplace law handbook 2011: employment law and human resources. (WLG 2011).
Forsyth, Anthony. “Australian Regulation of Economic Dismissals: Before, during, and after Work Choices.” (2008) SLR 30.
Friedman, Robert J. “Religious Discrimination in the Workplace: The Persistent Polarized Struggle.” (2009) TJBL 11.
House of Commons Petitions Committee and Women and Equalities Committee. High heels and workplace dress codes First Joint Report of Session (2016–17). <http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/petitions/291.pdf> Accessed 27 March 2017,
Howard, Erica. “Indirect discrimination 15 years on.” (2015) E-JICLS 4.
Kruppe, Thomas, Ralf Rogowski, and Klaus Schömann. Labour Market Efficiency in the European Union: Employment Protection and Fixed Term Contracts. (HTF 2013).
Kumra, Savita, Simonetta Manfredi, and Lucy Vickers. Managing Equality and Diversity: Theory and Practice. (OUP 2011).
Lawson, Anna. “Disability and Employment in the Equality Act 2010: Opportunities Seized, Lost and Generated.” (2011) ILJ 40.
Odeku, Kola, and Sola Animashaun. “Ensuring equality at the workplace by strengthening the law on prohibition against discrimination.” (2012) AJBM 6..
Pager, Devah, and Bruce Western. “Identifying discrimination at work: The use of field experiments.” (2012) JSI 68.
Sargeant, Malcolm. Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. (CUP 2011).
Southey, Kim. “Unfair dismissal for Australian workers: the hundred-year journey.” (2015) AAMJ 20.
Steve Williams, Gol, and Peter Scott, eds. Employment relations under coalition government: the UK experience, 2010-2015. (R 2016).
Thwaites, Lois. “The British Equality Framework is Incapable of Achieving Equality in the Workforce.” (2014) NR 2.
Wadham, John, David Ruebain, and Anthony Robinson. Blackstone’s Guide to the Equality Act 2010. (OUP 2012).
Yu Chang, Albert Vincent Y., and Andrew Thorson. A Legal Guide to Doing Business in the Asia-Pacific. (ABA Section of International Law 2010).
[1]Kruppe, Thomas, Ralf Rogowski, and Klaus Schömann. Labour Market Efficiency in the European Union: Employment Protection and Fixed Term Contracts. (HTF 2013), 2.
[2] Devah, Pager and Bruce Western. “Identifying discrimination at work: The use of field experiments.” (2012) JSI 68, 222.
[3] Kim Southey. “Unfair dismissal for Australian workers: the hundred-year journey.” (2015) AAMJ 20, 147.
[4] Anthony, Forsyth. “Australian Regulation of Economic Dismissals: Before, during, and after Work Choices.” (2008) SLR 30, 512.
[5] Anthony, Forsyth. “Australian Regulation of Economic Dismissals: Before, during, and after Work Choices.” (2008) SLR 30, 517.
[6] Anna,Chapman. “Protections in Relation to Dismissal: From the Workplace Relations Act to the Fair Work Act.” (2009) ULJ 3,763.
[7] Y Albert Vincent, Yu Chang, and Andrew Thorson. A Legal Guide to Doing Business in the Asia-Pacific. (ABA Section of International Law, 2010), 22.
[8] John, Wadham, David Ruebain, and Anthony Robinson. Blackstone’s Guide to the Equality Act 2010. (OUP 2012) 143.
[9] Lois, Thwaites. “The British Equality Framework is Incapable of Achieving Equality in the Workforce.” (2014) NV 2, 135.
[10] Malcolm, Sargeant. Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. (CUP, 2011), 28.
[11] Kola, Odeku and Sola Animashaun. “Ensuring equality at the workplace by strengthening the law on prohibition against discrimination.” (2012) AJBM 6, 4696.
[12] G, Williams Steve and Peter Scott . Employment relations under coalition government: the UK experience, 2010-2015. (R 2016), 96.
[13]J Robert, Friedman. “Religious Discrimination in the Workplace: The Persistent Polarized Struggle.” Transactions (2009) TJBL 11, 146.
[14] Hugh, Collins. Employment Law. (OUP 2010) 14.
[15] Malcolm, Sargeant. Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. (CUP, 2011), 29.
[16] House of Commons Petitions Committee and Women and Equalities Committee. High heels and
workplace dress codes First Joint Report of Session (2016–17). <http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/petitions/291.pdf> Accessed 27 March 2017, 3.
[17] House of Commons Petitions Committee and Women and Equalities Committee. High heels and
workplace dress codes First Joint Report of Session (2016–17). <http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/petitions/291.pdf> Accessed 27 March 2017, 3.
[18] Alex, Davies. Workplace law handbook 2011: employment law and human resources. (WLG 2011) 136.
[19] Alex, Davies. Workplace law handbook 2011: employment law and human resources. (WLG 2011) 136.
[20] Cabrelli, David A. Employment Law in Context: Text and Materials. (OUP 2016) 370.
[21] Malcolm, Sargeant. Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. (CUP, 2011), 30.
[22] Alex, Davies. Workplace law handbook 2011: employment law and human resources. (WLG 2011) 136.
[23] Malcolm, Sargeant. Age Discrimination and Diversity: Multiple Discrimination from an Age Perspective. (CUP, 2011), 30.
[24] Anna, Lawson. “Disability and Employment in the Equality Act 2010: Opportunities Seized, Lost and Generated.” (2011) ILJ 40, 371.
[25] Erica, Howard. “Indirect discrimination 15 years on.” (2015) E-JICLS 4, 1.
[26] Alex, Davies. Workplace law handbook 2011: employment law and human resources. (WLG 2011) 139.
[27] Savita, Kumra, Simonetta Manfredi, and Lucy Vickers. Managing Equality and Diversity: Theory and Practice. (OUP 2011) 48.
[28] Mark, Butler. Equality and Anti-Discrimination Law: The Equality Act 2010 and Other Anti-Discrimination Protections. (SPL 2016) 68.
