Flexibility in the Workplace & Discrimination by Association: Sharon Coleman Vs Attridge Law
|
|
ICMR HOME | Case Studies Collection
Case Details:
Case Code : HROB115
Case Length : 16 pages
Period : 2001-2008
Pub Date : 2008
Teaching Note :Not Available
Organization : Attridge Law/ miscellaneous
Industry : Law/ miscellaneous
Countries : UK, Europe
To download Flexibility in the Workplace & Discrimination by Association: Sharon Coleman Vs Attridge Law case study
(Case Code: HROB115) click on the button below, and select the case from the list of available cases:
Price:
For delivery in electronic format: Rs. 300;
For delivery through courier (within India): Rs. 300 + Shipping & Handling Charges extra
» Human Resource and Organization Behavior Case Studies
» HRM Short Case Studies
» View Detailed Pricing Info
» How To Order This Case
» Business Case Studies
» Area Specific Case Studies
» Industry Wise Case Studies
» Company Wise Case Studies
Please note:
This case study was compiled from published sources, and is intended to be used as a basis for class discussion. It is not intended to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a management situation. Nor is it a primary information source.
Chat with us
Please leave your feedback
|
|
<< Previous
Excerpts
Discrimination at the Workplace
Discrimination occurs when an employee suffers unfavorable or unfair treatment due to their race, religion, national origin, disabled, or veteran status, or other legally protected characteristics. This group could also include employees who are targeted/ victimized for opposing workplace discrimination or for reporting violations to the authorities...
How it all Began
Attridge Law was founded in 1982 in North London as a general common practice. As of 2008, it had five offices in the Central London area. It had 6 partners and over 35 lawyers who included a number of in-house advocates operating in all the higher courts including the Crown Court, High Court, Court of Appeal, and House of Lords. It was also accredited by the Law Society for training purposes. The firm changed its name in 2007 to EBR Attridge LLP after becoming a Limited Liability Partnership...
|
|
Coleman Sues Attridge Law & Steve Law
Coleman maintained that she had been forced into redundancy and that she had been discriminated against because she had a disabled son. After hearing her story, one of her friends told her that she could file a case of 'constructive dismissal'-- as someone who had been forced out of a job rather than sacked...
|
|
The Ruling
That the ruling would be in favor of Coleman became somewhat apparent in January 2007, when the Advocate General, Poiares Maduro, said that “one way of undermining the dignity and autonomy of people... is to target not them, but third persons who are closely associated with them... A robust conception of equality entails that these subtler forms of discrimination should also be caught by anti-discrimination legislation.”...
Implications for Employers
The ruling was the first of its kind, expanding the scope of employment discrimination under the European Law to include those who were associated with or responsible for a disabled person... |
Exhibits
Exhibit I: An overview of European Law Relevant to Discrimination or Equal Pay
Claims in England, Scotland and Wales
Exhibit II: The UK Law on Disability Discrimination
Exhibit III: A Brief Note on Flexible Working
Exhibit IV: UK Law on Flexible Working
|
|
