首页> 外文期刊>Occupational Health [at Work] >ABSENCE TRIGGER DECISION IS CONTROVERSIAL
【24h】

ABSENCE TRIGGER DECISION IS CONTROVERSIAL

机译:缺席触发决定是有争议的

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has decided that an employer did not need to adjust the trigger points in its attendance policy to allow more time off for a disabled employee. However, the EAT's decision is controversial and is under appeal, and should therefore be interpreted with caution. The case of Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions centred on the duty to make reasonable adjustments under section 20 of the Equality Act 2010 (EqA). Yet, even in the absence of the reasonable adjustment duty, there remains a need to avoid discrimination arising from disability (s.15) and indirect discrimination (s.19). A failure to allow greater leeway for a person who needed more time off because of their disability could still expose the employer to a claim of disability discrimination unless justified.
机译:就业上诉法庭(EAT)决定,雇主无需调整其出勤政策中的触发点,即可为残疾雇员留出更多的时间。但是,EAT的决定是有争议的,正在上诉中,因此应谨慎解释。格里菲斯(Griffiths)诉劳动和退休金国务卿一案的重点是根据《 2010年平等法》(EqA)第20条做出合理调整的责任。但是,即使没有合理的调整责任,仍然有必要避免因残疾(第15条)和间接歧视(第19条)而引起的歧视。除非有正当理由,否则无法为因残疾而需要更多时间休假的人留出更大的回旋余地,仍可能使雇主面临残疾歧视的指控。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号