Extension of employers' liability for harassment

Article Abstract:

A 1996 UK Court of Appeal decision redefined the test for harassment in holding an employer liable for its employees' racial harassment of another employee. The ruling set everyday speech as the standard for interpreting the "course of employment" test found in the 1976 Race Relations Act. Previously, employers could escape liability by claiming harassment to be unconnected to employees' authorized acts or job duties.

Race discrimination, Harassment (Law), Harassment

---

"Requirement or condition" need not be absolute bar

Article Abstract:

The ruling of the British Employment Appeal Tribunal in Falkirk Council v. Whyte states that indirect sex discrimination can apply to conditions for employment which are less than absolute bars and that therefore a 'desirable qualification' for a managerial position could be so considered when it was clear that this was decisive in the selection process.

Sex discrimination against women

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: "Political opinion" given broad meaning. "Intentional" indirect discrimination finding upheld. Employers not vicariously liable for discrimination
• Abstracts: Freedom and Fairness Restoration Act would simplify rules for qualified plans. Supreme Court overturns Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen
• Abstracts: Wide pay variations emerging. First hint of pay movement
• Abstracts: Remedies for unlawful discrimination. Fog begins to clear on "fairness at work."(United Kingdom) Competitive tendering did not excuse pay-cut
• Abstracts: Objective justification of pay differential only necessary where explanation is discriminatory. No right to full pay during maternity leave

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.