Author: Helen Duffy A former police sergeant is suing Kent Police under the Disability Discrimination Act (“DDA”). She suffers from a voice disorder, which results in her generally only being able to speak in a whisper. She wanted to become a dog handler but experienced problems because she could not shout controls to the animals. She claims that the force did not give her the opportunity to carry out the dog training. She has further claimed that she felt discriminated against after being asked to attend a meeting with the assistant chief constable after she left. When an employee suffers from a ‘disability’ under the DDA, an employer is obliged to make any ‘reasonable’ adjustments in order to assist that person in their employment. However, there is a limit to what is ‘reasonable’. It seems in this case that there is little that can be done if the employee’s disability actually prevents her from being able to do her job. Perhaps the dogs could be communicated to through whistle commands, but it would certainly go beyond reasonableness to expect the police force to re-train all of its dogs to respond to whistle, rather than shout commands, simply to cater for one officer’s disability. Employers are (and indeed should be) expected to assist employees with disabilities in any way that is reasonable, but there is a limit to what is expected of an employer. The Tribunal Judge made his opinion clear in his comment that, “The Disability Discrimination Act is not a charter to blame someone for everything that happens to them in life”
Read more from the original source:
When a “reasonable” adjustment is “unreasonable”
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation UK
Author: Laura Allen Diageo is in the process of taking legal action against Sainsbury’s for selling it’s own version of the gin-based drink called Pitcher’s. Sainsbury’s released Pitcher’s back in April this year stating that it was available in time for events such as Ascot, Henley and Wimbledon. Sainsbury’s has also advertised Pitcher’s as being cheaper than the branded equivalent, as well as saying that it has performed better in taste tests. Trademark experts say that Diageo is likely to be concerned that Sainsbury’s will be passing off the ‘copy’ drink as Pimm’s, as they have recently spent millions of pounds advertising their product using the catchphrase “it’s Pimm’s o’clock”. Comparisons can be drawn between the packaging of the two drinks, with both using red lettering in similar fonts, with a gold logo at the top of the label. This is not the first time that such matters have reached the courts, in 1997 Asda was found guilty of passing off its Puffin bars as United Biscuit’s Penguin biscuits. Brand owners will now be watching this matter carefully as it may encourage them to come forward if other retailers have ‘copycat’ items on their shelves. Diageo has admitted that it is taking legal proceedings in relation to an intellectual property matter, with Sainsbury’s saying that it will defend itself ‘vigorously’ against the allegations.
Read the rest here:
Protect your brand - Diageo and Sainsbury’s in legal battle over alleged copy of Pimm’s drink
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation UK
Author: Chris Cook SA Law won the toss and elected to bat - openers Satinder and the skipper got off to a lively start with some unexpected quick singles until Satinder was caught off a top edge. Chris A joined the skipper at the crease, both batting well to retire after reaching 25. Gary and Terence then formed a useful middle order partnership, both experiencing some good fortune as catches were spilled by the opposition. Terrence T had a rare failure with the bat after trying to force the pace in the last few overs. The returning Simon then reminded the team of his “talents” from former years as he joined Terence at the end of the innings to lift the score to a respectable 104 from SA Law’s 16 overs. In reply, both Terrence and Satinder had tidy opening spells to keep the Rayner Essex openers below the required run rate, assisted by some enthusiastic fielding as always, most notably from the ever-exuberant Nat and Terence. Matthew had trouble finding a good line and length and was punished by some solid stroke play by a suspiciously Aussie-looking Shane Richards, although later improved and was rewarded with a wicket. Chris A also bowled well, his first ball clean bowling Rayner Essex’s opening batsman. As the pressure mounted towards the end of the innings, SA Law’s fielding started to become suspect, as Gary, the usually dependable Terrence and Simon all spilled catches. Terence was left to bowl the last over with Rayner Essex needing 8 runs to win, and with a streaky two through the slips, a dropped catch for which the batsmen ran two and a powerfully struck four from the third ball, Rayner Essex reached their target with three balls to spare to record their seventh straight win of the summer. The team will look to drown their sorrows from a season of defeats at the end of season curry night next month.
See the original post here:
SA Law v Rayner Essex Accountants - Cricket Match
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation UK
Author: Helen Duffy Whilst reading the Sunday Times on the weekend I came across an article reminding me of the dangers of Facebook. According to the article, someone referred to as ‘Lindsay’ forgot that her boss was a ‘friend’ of hers on Facebook when she wrote “I HATE MY JOB - my boss is a total pervvy ****er. Always making me do stuff just to **ss me off!” So later that day her boss responded to her comment on Facebook, reminding her that she was still on her six month probationary period and told her not to bother going into the office the following day. Whilst this is a sobering reminder of the risks of Facebook, employers should also be careful about conducting their disciplinary procedures through such means. It seems in this case that ‘Lindsay’ was still within her first year of employment, but had she been employed for longer, this kind of response from her employer could have landed him in an employment tribunal.
View post:
Facing the Music on Facebook
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation UK
Author: Helen Duffy As employment lawyers continue to advise on redundancies, pay cuts and recruitment freezes, it is surprising to read that the latest CIPD/KPMG Labour Market Outlook (LMO) shows that one in ten employers intends to recruit migrant workers in the third quarter of 2009. Whilst the number of UK nationals in employment fell during the first quarter of 2009 compared with the year before, the number of non-UK nationals in employment actually increased in the same period. When asked about this, over a quarter of employers have said that they cannot find British workers to do the jobs. This shows that employers are successfully using the new points-based system introduced in February 2008 to recruit skilled workers. Gerwyn Davies, public policy adviser of the CIPD, commented that “The best way to provide ‘British jobs for British workers’ is to make Brits better equipped to compete in the job market rather than raise barriers to skilled migrants”. For more details from this report, see www.cipd.co.uk
More:
Numbers of migrant workers increase, despite the recession
Andria Bolton
Local Solicitors UK | Compensation UK
