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
11th March: Daily News, blog update and podcast up on Insite Law
Continued here:
11th March: Daily News, blog update and podcast up on Insite Law
Lawcast 115: Dr Paul Mason on the Innocence Network UK Today I’m talking to Dr Paul Mason Senior Lecturer and Director of Postgraduate Research at Cardiff University School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies. He is Chair of the UK Innocence Network Committee and co-ordinates the Cardiff Nexus Innocence Project. He also runs the Prison Media Monitoring Unit and edited [jc2m] Journal for Crime, Conflict and Media Culture 2004-6.Today we are going to talk about the Innocence Network, how it works, who is involved and what benefits it brings to client and all involved. Today we are going to talk about the Innocence Network, how it works, who is involved and what benefits it brings to client and all involved. Listen to the podcast
See the original post:
Lawcast 115: Dr Paul Mason on the Innocence Network UK
The update and podcast is up on Insite Law - It is a major update with the latest from UK Law blogs. Sign-up for a free newswire: If you would like to receive a FREE email newswire with must reads for news, reports, blog posts etc of the week past - no frills, just good info to help you keep up to date - please sign up here. Newswire #5: 1 March | See Insiteblog for past issues of Insite and newswire
The rest is here:
5th March: Daily law news and podcast up on Insite Law
I am doing a podcast soon with Steve Hynes, Director of The Legal Action Group (LAG) as part of my current series of podcasts on civil liberties and human rights. We plan to focus on Legal Aid (or the lack of it) in civil cases and access to justice issues. LAG has a book on Legal Aid coming out in mid-March and e’ll certainly mention that in our podcast. Steve is the director of the Legal Action Group (LAG). LAG is a charity that through its publishing and training services plays an important role in increasing lawyers’ and advisers’ knowledge of the law. It also carries out policy and campaigning work mainly focused on publicly funded legal services, advocating for the voice of the end-user to be heard. Other Lawcasts on Civil Liberties in the series so far : Roger Smith, Director of Justice on civil liberties and human rights Michael Burdett, Unbalancing the Scales of Justice Carl Gardner, on the Qatada judgement Carl Gardner on Freedom of Speech - the Geert Wilders exclusion Ian Parker-Jospeh, Leader of the UK Libertarian Party
The rest is here:
Coming soon… lawcast with Steve Hynes, Director of LAG…
Daily news and news podcast up on Insite Law Sign-up for a free email weekly newswire | Read Newswire #3: 15 February
Originally posted here:
19th February: News and daily podcast up on Insite Law
Curiously, I was at a loss for something to do this morning so I took a trip to the Moon , fully reported on Twitter - where else! Frankly, we would all probably be freer if we were on the Moon these days given the present governments taste for CCTV cameras, ID cards, promulgating new criminal offences and Robocop thinking when it comes to controlling the British people. The latest stunt being pulled by the government in the dying days of their 12 year “Protectorate” ( taste precluded me from using the rather more emotive “Reich”) is the plan in the Welfare Reform Bill in the House of Commons committee stage this to week to allow the newly renamed Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission to take away the driving licences and passports of parents who refuse to pay for their children - without a court order. As The Law Society Gazette reported: ” Justice Director Roger Smith described the ‘disproportionate’ sanctions as the thin end of the wedge. They are sure to creep into others areas of dispute once the link between the method of enforcement and what’s at stake is broken.” Another stunt pulled by the government was to jail parents for the truancy of their children. The BBC reported this week: “A parent is jailed for their child’s truancy once a fortnight every school term in England and Wales, analysis of court statistics shows.” This plan was a big FAIL. One wonders if this idea was dreamed up when half the Cabinet were smoking cannabis. Child doesn’t go to school. Jail parent. Child goes into care if from a one parent family, possibly brutalised by the experience and less receptive to school than before and taxpayer picks up bill for high cost of imprisoning parents. Clever stuff. The BBC dredges up ex-minister Estelle Smith and sundry Lib-Dems to wring their hands and undergo ritual atonement and exculpation. I can’t even be bothered to quote from the report. I’m with the ex-Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, on this one. We have far too many criminal laws, far too much political interference with the Judiciary, way too many CCTV cameras, irritating regulations, cash raising fine schemes and interferences in our lives in this once green and pleasant land. So…pouring a libation to my taste… on to the other matters of the week… At a loss for something to do this Sunday morning, I decided to make a moon landing. This was reported fully on Twitter of course - where else? I was also able to do my 100th podcast with my friend Dan Hull, a lawyer in the United States , who can be relied upon to be robust, controversial and to the point. We talked of many things including the future of lawyers post recession. Geert Wilders tried to hit our shores to show his film to a group of peers in The House of Lords. He was frustrated in this endeavour by the Home Secretary who banned him from entry on grounds, inter alia, that Lord Ahmed had indicated there would be 10,000 muslims on the streets. Wilders ignored the letter and arrived at Heathrow to be excluded by Immigration and Border Agency officers. I did a podcast with Carl Gardner who believes that the Home Secretary acted unlawfully . I agree with his analysis. Rather more worrying…. this exclusion was yet another example of our government believing they know best. It was a shameful decision; riding roughshod, whatever one may think of Wilders, over the reputation of this country to handle difficulty with debate, with reason, with parody, ridicule and mockery - rather than the blunt bludgeon of the law - misunderstood, possibly, in this case. 10,000 muslims did not turn up at Heathrow or stampede on our streets - possibly because they are more rational than Lord Ahmed. It is not Thunderbirds are GO for Alistair Darling on the banks lending front , nor, it would seem, on the issue of his own expenses. Guido Fawkes jumps on the story with his usual enthusiasm. I quote: “When the man in charge of the nation’s finances, Alistair Darling, has been caught fiddling his expenses , and Jacqui Smith, the woman who is in charge of crime prevention is accused of corruption , you have a government which is a kleptocracy. The New Labour promise to be “whiter than white” is like a sick joke now.” Another week begins tomorrow. I shall be at my post, watching our shores, checking the Thames for U-Boats and French Ships of the Line… I shall be back. Have a good one. Regards as always
Continued here:
Sunday 15th February: Postcard from The Moon
