Employers warned against playing politics when it comes to the sack this Christmas

A Rotherham couple banned from fostering children because they are members of UKIP made headline news but Oxley & Coward Solicitors is warning employers that taking similar action with employees risks falling foul of European human rights rulings.
 
Dec. 13, 2012 - PRLog -- A Rotherham couple banned from fostering children because they are members of UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party) made headline news around the world, but local legal experts Oxley & Coward Solicitors LLP is warning employers that taking similar action with employees risks falling foul of new European human rights rulings which safeguard employees.

The unnamed couple has reportedly fostered many children from ethnic backgrounds, yet have spoken of how social workers accused them of belonging to a “racist party” when their UKIP membership became known. While politicians and others have lined up to condemn the actions of Rotherham Council in this case, it is likely to simply add to confusion over political affiliations; coming hard on the heels of a judgement from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

Earlier this month, the ECtHR ruled the UK is in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights by not providing adequate protection for employees who are dismissed on the grounds of their political beliefs. The ruling was given in a case brought by Bradford bus driver Mr Redfearn and is likely to lead to a change in the law for UK employers.

Mr Redfearn had been working for Serco under a contract with Bradford City Council to transport disabled children and adults, when he successfully stood as a candidate for the BNP in local elections. Soon after the election, Mr Redfearn was summarily dismissed. Serco said they believed “his employment would present a risk to health and safety of its employees and passengers,” and that he could cause damage to their reputation which might jeopardise the contract they held with the council.

Mr Redfearn took action against Serco, pointing to his exemplary employment record. His rights would have been protected if he had qualified for unfair dismissal, but he did not have sufficient service to bring an unfair dismissal claim, and his attempted race claim also failed. As a result, he brought a case to the ECtHR. The Court ruled in his favour, saying the UK was failing to protect the individual’s right to freedom of assembly under Article 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights, because anyone with insufficient qualifying service for unfair dismissal claims had no right to challenge a dismissal arising from their political beliefs.

The judges said that Article 11 must apply equally, whether or not those include views which may offend, shock or disturb.

“The case heard by the European Court was not about the rights or wrongs of Mr Redfearn’s dismissal, it was simply ruling on what they saw as a deficiency in UK law, but it is clearly one that could have implications for employers,” said Oxley & Coward employment law expert Mamoon Chaudhary. “The pressure is now on the UK government to introduce a change in the law to ensure that employee’s rights will be adequately protected in future.”

“We may see an additional exception introduced to the unfair dismissal qualifying period, or through the opportunity to bring a free-standing claim where there are grounds of political opinion or affiliation.”

In addition, Mamoon adds that the charge for dismissal on the grounds of political action or belief is likely to be unfair dismissal rather than the more serious breach of human rights and points to a couple of recent examples of dismissals on the grounds of behaviour outside of work viewed as being inappropriate to the employees ‘day job’ to support this view.

“There have been a number of cases over recent years were people have sought action after dismissal from their jobs for out of work activities.” Mr Chaudhary added. “The case of a teacher who worked as a stripper and that of a probation officer who ran an S&M club are two extreme examples. In both these cases the claim was for unfair dismissal not a breach of human rights and I suspect it will be the same for political affiliations."

For further information, contact Oxley & Coward Solicitors on 01709 510999, visit www.oxcow.co.uk or e-mail family@oxcow.co.uk
End
Source: » Follow
Email:***@beyondpr.co.uk Email Verified
Zip:S47WW
Tags:UKIP, Political Affiliations, Oxley And Coward, Solicitors, Rotherham
Industry:Legal
Location:England
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse
BeyondPR News
Trending
Most Viewed
Daily News



Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share