A new criminal offence of sex-based harassment makes it a criminal offence to intentionally harass, alarm, or distress a person because of their actual or presumed sex.  While the offence has been principally introduced to address the sexual harassment of a person in a public space it has relevance for employers in terms of taking reasonable steps to prevent harassment in the workplace. Listen along for more details!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In this case, the EAT has considered whether an NHS employer’s requirement for its community nurses to work flexibly, including at weekends, was objectively justified.  The nurse who brought the claim was a single parent who always worked on the same two days each week and who said that her childcare commitments made it difficult for her to work flexibly and impossible for her to work weekends. Listen along to see what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In this case, the EAT considered whether a council employee could bring a whistleblowing detriment claim in relation to failing to secure a job offer where she had already settled a claim based on the same protected disclosures via a COT3 agreement. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In this case an employment tribunal was tasked with deciding whether a manager was entitled to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal when he was disciplined for failing to challenge the sexist culture in the fire station where he had significant line management responsibility. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

While the reason for a dismissal is often clear, this is not always so. In this case, the reason for dismissal was not clear and accordingly, the EAT had to consider whether what the decision-maker actually decided must be analysed to determine the principal reason for the dismissal in order to resolve the question of whether the dismissal was fair or not. Listen along to see what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

The government has published a new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility aiming to, among other things, protect Muslims from unacceptable hostile behaviour. Listen along to find out more!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In this case, the EAT was asked to consider whether significant defects in an internal appeal process, including placing the onus on the employee to nominate a manager to hear the appeal after failed attempts to convene the appeal hearing, meant that the subsequent dismissal was unfair. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

This recent EAT decision offers useful guidance as to the scope of an employer’s duty to make reasonable adjustments within the context of a redeployment and, in particular, considers whether “bumping” another employee to create a vacancy for a disabled employee is a reasonable adjustment. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

The EAT was tasked in this case with determining whether it had been discriminatory to withdraw  a job offer made to a Christian worker after finding out he had previously written Facebook posts in which he spoke negatively about homosexuality. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

In this case, the EAT was asked to consider whether an employee’s previous tolerance of inappropriate language is a relevant factor that should be considered when determining a sexual harassment claim.  The employee complained that she had been sexually harassed at work and the employer argued that the conduct complained off was “office banter”, the kind of which had been ongoing for a significant period of time and about which the employee had never complained before. Listen along to find out what happened!

Visit www.indicator.co.uk to explore our product range, or connect with us on social media:

LinkedIn

YouTube

Facebook

Instagram

Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.