In message
<[log in to unmask]>, at
15:34:40 on Thu, 1 Sep 2005, "Lewis, Chris G." <[log in to unmask]>
writes
>Absolutely not, as I understand it. There are rafts of laws about not
>discriminating on the basis of trade union membership. If the strikes
>were illegal, then maybe, but otherwise, no.
I can see how you could be prevented from a blanket policy of not
employing trade unionists (in general). But how can you force someone to
employ a person who they know to be troublemaker?
>As for the sex addict, I can't see a problem with keeping a record of
>that sort of person, although I presume there may be employment law
>issues in the UK about not employing them on the basis of past
>misconduct in (effectively, it seems) another company or for criminal
>convictions.
These folks are being employed in Turkey, Egypt, Japan, etc. Does that
have any bearing on the matter?
--
Roland Perry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|