Muslim terror attack on London Bridge

[Mr. Sausages]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

Under the Employment Act 2006 section 126 you would be acting unlawfully if you discriminated on the grounds of religion.  Covered under the Equality Act 2010 in the UK. 

What if you discriminated on the grounds of someone displaying illogical thought processes, citing a belief in the supernatural with no evidence?

[manxman1980]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Sausages said:

What if you discriminated on the grounds of someone displaying illogical thought processes, citing a belief in the supernatural with no evidence?

Good question! 

For the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 'religion' means any religion, or lack of religion, and 'belief' means any religious or philosophical belief or lack of belief.  

To be a protected 'religion', it must have a clear structure and belief system.  'Religious belief' is only protected if it affects how a person lives their life or how they perceive the world and it must, be genuinely held and not just an opinion or point of view, be a belief about a weighty or substantial aspect of human life and behaviour, attain a level of logic, seriousness, structure and importance, and be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict any of the fundamental rights of others.

So the answer to your question is, are there enough other nutty people around who share that belief?

[Mr. Sausages]

7 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

and be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not incompatible with human dignity and not conflict any of the fundamental rights of others.

So it's only Buddhists that you can't discriminate against.

[Tarne]

I see the guardian puts out another click bait of "Anti muslim crimes increase five fold since London Bridge attacks" According to "Tell Mama", the muslim group. 

Though when you actually look at figures that are available (which the most recent are not yet, because it's only been less than a week), that's not true at all. 

I'd like it if newspapers couldn't spread lies.

[woody2]

2 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Your choice, but you would be acting unlawfully if you were an employer and open to Employment Tribunal claims.  If you were an employer, and I seriously doubt you are, then you would have to ensure you had a budget to pay out the compensation.  

You would certainly struggle to get covered for such claims under an insurance policy.

On the off chance that you are an employer could you provide me with your company details.  I could do with some extra income.

yes i am a company director, have been for 30+ years, never been taken to tribunal, the fact is they wouldn't even get an interview, they can't do the job, easy..... 

[woolley]

3 hours ago, woody2 said:

from experience this is why you need to ask these questions....

if they need to find a mosque 7 times a day, they won't be fit for a job with me....

It's worse than that, Woody. YOU are supposed to provide a place for them to pray!

[woolley]

There you go, Woody.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/6811794/Offices-should-have-quiet-rooms-rather-than-prayer-rooms-so-atheists-can-use-them-too-employers-group-claims.html

Bit of guidance here so you can get set up.

[Tarne]

You just wouldn't employ any, it's that simple, heh. 

[woody2]

5 minutes ago, woolley said:

It's worse than that, Woody. YOU are supposed to provide a place for them to pray!

 "we have to stop this concert just so one of the crew can go pray" i can see the riots now......

[woody2]

if you aren't capable of doing the job no tribunal will take action..... 

[manxman1980]

34 minutes ago, woody2 said:

yes i am a company director, have been for 30+ years, never been taken to tribunal, the fact is they wouldn't even get an interview, they can't do the job, easy..... 

There have been a number of cases which have uncovered serial litigants who would just love to find a company director like you.  These are people who apply for jobs with their sole purpose being to bring a claim for some form of discrimination and they have managed to win a lot of cases in the past.  There is now advice available on how to deal with such litigants but you are wide open to them with your attitude.

I am aware of one such serial litigant being discovered when he failed to attend an Employment Tribunal.  When they contacted him to find out why he said it was because it clashed with another Employment Tribunal case he had in another part of the country.  The one he attended had the potential for a bigger award hence his decision.

14 minutes ago, woody2 said:

if you aren't capable of doing the job no tribunal will take action..... 

That depends on the nature of the claim.  To assert that someone is not capable of doing a job because of their religion would be a very difficult case to run unless you had a good reason (e.g. you are a church).  Saying that they are not capable because they need to pray occasionally just won't cut it.

[woody2]

2 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

There have been a number of cases which have uncovered serial litigants who would just love to find a company director like you.  These are people who apply for jobs with their sole purpose being to bring a claim for some form of discrimination and they have managed to win a lot of cases in the past.  There is now advice available on how to deal with such litigants but you are wide open to them with your attitude.

I am aware of one such serial litigant being discovered when he failed to attend an Employment Tribunal.  When they contacted him to find out why he said it was because it clashed with another Employment Tribunal case he had in another part of the country.  The one he attended had the potential for a bigger award hence his decision.

That depends on the nature of the claim.  To assert that someone is not capable of doing a job because of their religion would be a very difficult case to run unless you had a good reason (e.g. you are a church).  Saying that they are not capable because they need to pray occasionally just won't cut it.

so you stop glasto just so someone can go pray, right......

[quilp]

Would the pope employ a rabid Atheist like me? 

[woolley]

28 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

There have been a number of cases which have uncovered serial litigants who would just love to find a company director like you.  These are people who apply for jobs with their sole purpose being to bring a claim for some form of discrimination and they have managed to win a lot of cases in the past.  There is now advice available on how to deal with such litigants but you are wide open to them with your attitude.

I am aware of one such serial litigant being discovered when he failed to attend an Employment Tribunal.  When they contacted him to find out why he said it was because it clashed with another Employment Tribunal case he had in another part of the country.  The one he attended had the potential for a bigger award hence his decision.

That depends on the nature of the claim.  To assert that someone is not capable of doing a job because of their religion would be a very difficult case to run unless you had a good reason (e.g. you are a church).  Saying that they are not capable because they need to pray occasionally just won't cut it.

So it's the law that's an ass. Yes? And of course the lawyers who encourage such amoral litigation.

[woody2]