individual employment relations cases
and legislation QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
1. ATKINSON & LUDLOW V TRESS ENGINEERING CO.LTD. (1976) - ANSWER-two tea
girls, who had been paid 81p in keeping with hour, claimed equality with a male
trendy labourer who labored inside the equal canteen for 88.8p according to hour.
The two jobs were rated equal in a JES. As a end result, the Company provided
the girls same phrases to that of the person. The girls did now not want that,
however. All they wanted became equal pay, due to the fact they were given 3 days
more holiday than he did and they had a 'personnel popularity which they needed
to hold.
2. It changed into held that they might hold their group of workers reputation and their more
holidays at the same time as getting the identical price of pay as the person because
what the Act calls for is that every time period inside the lady's contract need to be no
much less favourable than the corresponding time period inside the man's settlement.
CAPPER PASS V LAWTON (1976) - ANSWER-Lawton worked as a cook within the
organisation's executive eating room where she supplied lunches for 10 - 20
humans according to day. She sought identical pay with males who worked within
the essential work's canteen imparting as much as 350 food in keeping with day.
3. The simplest different differences had been that she worked for 40 hours in keeping with
week and not using a supervision, while the 2 males labored for 45 hours in step with
week below the supervision of a head chef.
It changed into held that she became entitled to equal pay because the paintings
changed into widely similar and the variations were of no realistic significance.
CLARKE V. ELEY (IMI) KYNOCH LTD (1982) - ANSWER-the unions and control had
mutually agreed a redundancy choice process underneath which part-time group
of workers would be made redundant before full-time team of workers. Two ladies
who were brushed off underneath this technique claimed that the rule
discriminated towards them due to the fact, in fact, most component-timers had
been girls. It changed into held that this turned into a shape of oblique
discrimination. The reason being that less women (because of their caring
position) had been able to work full time (the supply being applied) than guys.
4. Disability Discrimination (Employment) Regulations 1996 - ANSWER-provide that
much less beneficial remedy of a disabled person is justified
5. EATON LTD V NUTTALL (1977) - ANSWER-however, Nuttall, who changed into
responsible for ordering parts and materials for forklift vehicles, did the same
work as a male colleague who turned into paid at a higher fee. She treated
materials most effective up to a value of £2.50 even as the man treated substances
, valued at some thing from £5 to £1000. A mistake through the man might
manifestly have had greater critical effects and therefore his job turned into seen
as having more obligation connected to it.
It turned into held that the extra obligation constituted a fabric difference among
the two jobs and therefore the employers have been justified in paying the man
greater than the female.
6. Equality Act 2010 - ANSWER-Protects human beings from discrimination inside the
place of work and in wider society. It sets out the special methods wherein it's far
illegal to deal with a person.
7. Equality Act 2010 time table 9 - ANSWER-true occupational necessities
8. Equality Act 2010 segment thirteen - ANSWER-covers direct discrimination
9. Equality Act 2010 phase 19 - ANSWER-indirect discrimination
10.Equality Act 2010 segment 26 - ANSWER-this phase covers harassment inside the
place of business
11.Equality Act 2010 phase 7 - ANSWER-discrimination of gender reassignment, trans
rights
12.Equality Act 2010 phase nine - ANSWER-racial discrimination, defining race and
additionally including nationality and ethnicity
13.Equality Act 2010 sections 64 to eighty three - ANSWER-these sections cover gender
discrimination
14.GREIG V. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY (1979) - ANSWER-Greig and every other ladies
were appointed to jobs, which might have involved then in running along some of
men. When the other woman failed to show up for work, Greig become now not
allowed to start paintings either. The employers' motive turned into given as being
that they'd skilled hassle inside the beyond wherein a female become required to
paintings in an otherwise all male team. Apart from being in their interests, they
argued that it became also for the female's own properly. It become held that the
employers' reasons in refusing to allow Greig to start her activity were irrelevant
and that this turned into a case of direct discrimination.
15.GUBALA V. CROMPTON PARKINSON LTD (1977) - ANSWER-the Company became
going to make one in all its personnel redundant and the selection lay among a
man and a girl. The female had more provider than the person, and the use of what
was at that time the everyday 'final-in', first-out precept, it become the person who
ought to had been brushed off. However, the Company decided to brush aside the
woman due to the fact she become young and had a husband who changed into
running, whereas the man was 58 years vintage, and had a family to guide and a
loan to pay. In different words, the Company assumed that the man changed into
the 'breadwinner' in his circle of relatives and that the female turned into no longer
the 'breadwinner' in hers, and used this as the premise for her choice for
redundancy. The Tribunal refused to simply accept the 'breadwinner' criterion as
the basis for redundancy selection, and held that Gubala were unlawful
discriminated towards at the grounds of her sex.
16.HAYWARD V CAMMELL LAIRD SHIPBUILDERS LTD (1986) - ANSWER-Hayward, a
cook dinner within the organisation's canteen, turned into held by using the ET to
and legislation QUESTIONS AND
ANSWERS
1. ATKINSON & LUDLOW V TRESS ENGINEERING CO.LTD. (1976) - ANSWER-two tea
girls, who had been paid 81p in keeping with hour, claimed equality with a male
trendy labourer who labored inside the equal canteen for 88.8p according to hour.
The two jobs were rated equal in a JES. As a end result, the Company provided
the girls same phrases to that of the person. The girls did now not want that,
however. All they wanted became equal pay, due to the fact they were given 3 days
more holiday than he did and they had a 'personnel popularity which they needed
to hold.
2. It changed into held that they might hold their group of workers reputation and their more
holidays at the same time as getting the identical price of pay as the person because
what the Act calls for is that every time period inside the lady's contract need to be no
much less favourable than the corresponding time period inside the man's settlement.
CAPPER PASS V LAWTON (1976) - ANSWER-Lawton worked as a cook within the
organisation's executive eating room where she supplied lunches for 10 - 20
humans according to day. She sought identical pay with males who worked within
the essential work's canteen imparting as much as 350 food in keeping with day.
3. The simplest different differences had been that she worked for 40 hours in keeping with
week and not using a supervision, while the 2 males labored for 45 hours in step with
week below the supervision of a head chef.
It changed into held that she became entitled to equal pay because the paintings
changed into widely similar and the variations were of no realistic significance.
CLARKE V. ELEY (IMI) KYNOCH LTD (1982) - ANSWER-the unions and control had
mutually agreed a redundancy choice process underneath which part-time group
of workers would be made redundant before full-time team of workers. Two ladies
who were brushed off underneath this technique claimed that the rule
discriminated towards them due to the fact, in fact, most component-timers had
been girls. It changed into held that this turned into a shape of oblique
discrimination. The reason being that less women (because of their caring
position) had been able to work full time (the supply being applied) than guys.
4. Disability Discrimination (Employment) Regulations 1996 - ANSWER-provide that
much less beneficial remedy of a disabled person is justified
5. EATON LTD V NUTTALL (1977) - ANSWER-however, Nuttall, who changed into
responsible for ordering parts and materials for forklift vehicles, did the same
work as a male colleague who turned into paid at a higher fee. She treated
materials most effective up to a value of £2.50 even as the man treated substances
, valued at some thing from £5 to £1000. A mistake through the man might
manifestly have had greater critical effects and therefore his job turned into seen
as having more obligation connected to it.
It turned into held that the extra obligation constituted a fabric difference among
the two jobs and therefore the employers have been justified in paying the man
greater than the female.
6. Equality Act 2010 - ANSWER-Protects human beings from discrimination inside the
place of work and in wider society. It sets out the special methods wherein it's far
illegal to deal with a person.
7. Equality Act 2010 time table 9 - ANSWER-true occupational necessities
8. Equality Act 2010 segment thirteen - ANSWER-covers direct discrimination
9. Equality Act 2010 phase 19 - ANSWER-indirect discrimination
10.Equality Act 2010 segment 26 - ANSWER-this phase covers harassment inside the
place of business
11.Equality Act 2010 phase 7 - ANSWER-discrimination of gender reassignment, trans
rights
12.Equality Act 2010 phase nine - ANSWER-racial discrimination, defining race and
additionally including nationality and ethnicity
13.Equality Act 2010 sections 64 to eighty three - ANSWER-these sections cover gender
discrimination
14.GREIG V. COMMUNITY INDUSTRY (1979) - ANSWER-Greig and every other ladies
were appointed to jobs, which might have involved then in running along some of
men. When the other woman failed to show up for work, Greig become now not
allowed to start paintings either. The employers' motive turned into given as being
that they'd skilled hassle inside the beyond wherein a female become required to
paintings in an otherwise all male team. Apart from being in their interests, they
argued that it became also for the female's own properly. It become held that the
employers' reasons in refusing to allow Greig to start her activity were irrelevant
and that this turned into a case of direct discrimination.
15.GUBALA V. CROMPTON PARKINSON LTD (1977) - ANSWER-the Company became
going to make one in all its personnel redundant and the selection lay among a
man and a girl. The female had more provider than the person, and the use of what
was at that time the everyday 'final-in', first-out precept, it become the person who
ought to had been brushed off. However, the Company decided to brush aside the
woman due to the fact she become young and had a husband who changed into
running, whereas the man was 58 years vintage, and had a family to guide and a
loan to pay. In different words, the Company assumed that the man changed into
the 'breadwinner' in his circle of relatives and that the female turned into no longer
the 'breadwinner' in hers, and used this as the premise for her choice for
redundancy. The Tribunal refused to simply accept the 'breadwinner' criterion as
the basis for redundancy selection, and held that Gubala were unlawful
discriminated towards at the grounds of her sex.
16.HAYWARD V CAMMELL LAIRD SHIPBUILDERS LTD (1986) - ANSWER-Hayward, a
cook dinner within the organisation's canteen, turned into held by using the ET to
