In message
<[log in to unmask]>, at
16:10:41 on Thu, 1 Sep 2005, "Lewis, Chris G." <[log in to unmask]>
writes
>
>
> Roland Perry:
>
> >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?
>
> It depends if by "troublemaker" you mean an active trade
>unionist. I think you'll be in hot water for refusing to employ them
>because they have exercised their legal right to strike in the past.
>
> As I said, if the person had been involved in any illegal strike
>activity, I think you may have a reason. Otherwise, no.
If it was a blanket policy, perhaps. But for individuals, I can't see
it.
You aren't supposed to discriminate on religious grounds, but if a
Christian was a known troublemaker (for causing dissent in the
workplace) could you be guilty of religious discrimination when you
refused to employ them?
--
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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|