Dear Colleagues

Thanks for your email.

You may find the following extract from the Blackstone's Guide to the Employment Equality Regulations 2003 (published by Oxford University Press) quite useful in this instance. I've paraphrased the section in question, but the full extract can be found on page 44 of the Guide:

Regulation 6(2)(b) of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003, which covers the opportunities for promotion, transfers, training or any other benefits, may operate in this case. For example, a potentially discriminatory situation could arise where there is an employment requirement that five days of the employee's annual entitlement be used over Christmas, and three over Easter. An example of how such discrimination can manifest itself would be where a Muslim member of staff may wish to make a pilgramage to Mecca for Hajj, but is unable to do so because of the requirement to use part of his or her annual entitlement over the Christmas and Easter period.

The Guide recommends that, if it is reasonably practicable for the employer to make other arrangements, the following solutions should be considered:

1) A degree of flexibility should operate when holidays are taken, or
2) The employee should be allowed to take unpaid leave during some of the time off

It may constitute indirect discrimination if the employer refuses to take such steps where it is reasonably practicable to do so. Alternatively, where there is a business necessity that the employee takes holiday when allocated by the employer, then the disadvantage may be justifiable and there would be no indirect discrimination.

From this extract, the following points should therefore be noted:

* There is potential for indirect discrimination to occur in situations where employees are required to use their annual leave for the Christmas period. Where annual leave is not a factor, it is unlikely that discrimination will occur.

* Business necessity (and health and safety) are important considerations in cases of indirect discrimination on the grounds of religion and belief. If, for example, an employee cannot show that he or she will be able to work from home (perhaps because their job requires them to be in the office) then the institution should consider whether it is reasonably practicable for the office to be open during that period. If, based on business efficacy and/or health and safety, it is not, then it may be justifiable to refuse a request to work during this period. Insitutions should then consider adopting a more flexible approach to the taking of holidays as suggested by the Guide.

I would agree with Mannie's point that there may be linkages with the RRAA in this area. Institutions should consider whether such linkages, where relevant, are being picked up through impact assessment and consultative processes. These can then feed into the institution's planning processes as appropriate. Generally speaking, the law provides the minimum standard from which institutions should operate, so it is recommended that institutions recognise and enhance their knowledge of the local context during implementation, so that the legal requirements benefit staff, students and the institution itself.

Please note that the ECU is in the process of providing guidance in this area, which we hope will be available shortly. If you would like to be a critical reader for this publication, please reply to me (off list please).

With best wishes

Saheema

Saheema Rawat
Policy Adviser - Race, Religion and Belief
Equality Challenge Unit
Direct tel +44 (0)20 7520 7063 Email [log in to unmask]
3rd Floor, 4 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9RA
tel +44 (0)20 7520 7060 Fax +44 (0)20 7520 7069
Web www.ecu.ac.uk Email [log in to unmask]

*****************************************************************************************************************************
The Equality Challenge Unit promotes diversity and equality of opportunity for all who work or seek to work in higher education. We are sponsored by the representative bodies (SCOP and Universities UK) and the four UK HE funding bodies.

Although every effort is made to ensure that the information contained within this email is timely and accurate, the Equality Challenge Unit cannot be held responsible for any unintentional errors or omissions.

The information provided in this email is not intended to be either legally binding or contractual in nature. Should you require more specific advice regarding the application of equalities legislation, it is recommended that you consult an appropriately qualified legal professional.

This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy or disclose this message to anyone but should kindly notify the sender and delete the message. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message which do not relate to the official business of the ECU shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. No contracts shall be concluded by means of this e-mail. Neither ECU nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses. The administrator of this e-mail service (Universities UK) reserves the right to access and disclose all messages sent over its e-mail system.

*****************************************************************************************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: HE Administrators equal opportunities list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Vincent Cornelius
Sent: 06 January 2005 12:15
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Christmas closure and home working and any other issues to
do with religion, belief and non-belief


Just to read...




Vincent Cornelius
HR Training and Development Adviser
Portland Building 0.38
De Montfort University
The Gateway
Leicester
LE1 9RG
01162506435
#6698


Visit the HR T&D Intranet Site at:
http://snowball/sub_training_development/Default.htm
<http://snowball/sub_training_development/Default.htm>



-----Original Message-----
From: Mannie Kusemamuriwo
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 January 2005 12:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Christmas closure and home working and any other issues to do
with religion, belief and non-belief



Dear Colleagues,



I quite agree with seeking official guidance from the ECU but I would also
suggest seeking additional comments from the recognized official Bodies and
Groups within the UK, not necessarily to be told what to do but to inform
our institutional decisions, under the reasonable and practicable Equality
and Diversity "litmus test" on the action that we finally decide to take,
both individually and institutionally. We could obtain further comments
and/or suggestions from the British Muslim Association, the Jewish Board of
Deputies, to name but a couple and as dictated by what groups are looking
for institutional redress within a particular HEI.



Issues to do with religion, belief and non-belief could also be regarded as
coming under the ambit of the RRAA requirements (albeit indirectly) because
of the racial groups that are involved and the definition of unlawful
indirect, institutional and individual racial discriminatory practice. These
issues would then be regarded as race equality relevant and as such would
therefore need to be dealt with, relative to the requirements of the RRAA's
General and Specific Duties. The CRE might also be a good source of
information to add to our decision making processes. Whatever the CRE says,
at least it will show that we are committed enough to get all the
appropriate information that we can, before we decide to act in whatever way
finally we do. We can also show that our decision was as fully informed as
possible, how and by whom.



These can also be very personal and emotive issues, especially taking the
current environment around some religions, into account. The more we can
take our institutional decisions and subsequent actions, away from an
individual and idiosyncratic approach and base them on institutional
functioning that can be shown to be as well informed as possible, the more
likely we are to come up with institutional decisions that are fair and
just, good for all our stakeholders and can stand up to any reasonable
scrutiny and/or interrogation that way well result, whatever decision we
make in the end.



I hope this helps and please feel free to come back for any clarification
that you might need on any of the suggestions that I am making.



Warm regards and a wonderful New Year to you all!!



Mannie.

  _____

From: HE Administrators equal opportunities list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Aslam, M
Sent: 06 January 2005 11:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Christmas closure and home working




To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go to
http://disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm

Colleagues

I think guidance from ECU would be very helpful .

Best wishes for 2005 to everyone.



 M.Aslam

Human Resources Consultant

Leeds Metropolitan University

-----Original Message-----
From: Adamson, Sheila [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 January 2005 10:24
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Christmas closure and home working

Could anyone offer any practical advice on how to deal with Christmas
holidays? In common with many HEIs, we close over Christmas and New Year and
all staff are required to be on holiday. It has been suggested that those
who don't want to celebrate Christmas (whether as a christian or pagan
festival!) should be allowed to work and use the holidays at a more suitable
time. For most staff this isn't possible as the building is closed. However
some staff, particularly academics, can argue that they could work from
home. This raises a separate issue of equity, of course, between different
categories of staff within the organisation.

Any ideas where I could get some guidance? What are other universities
doing?

Sheila

Sheila Adamson
Planning and Policy Officer
Strategic Planning and Policy Unit
Queen Margaret University College
Edinburgh




This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system
manager at Trinity Development immediately on +44 (0)191 350 6538 quoting
the name of the sender and the addressee and then delete it from your
system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
company. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments
for the presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage
caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
**********
The Equality Challenge Unit promotes diversity and equality of opportunity for all who work or seek to work in higher education. We are sponsored by the representative bodies (SCOP and Universities UK) and the four UK HE funding bodies.

This message is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you should not copy or disclose this message to anyone but should kindly notify the sender and delete the message. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message which do not relate to the official business of the ECU shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. No contracts shall be concluded by means of this e-mail. Neither ECU nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses. The administrator of this e-mail service (Universities UK) reserves the right to access and disclose all messages sent over its e-mail system.
**********