Employment Law Vs Discrimination Law

[wherebee]

Somethink just struck me.

If an employer asks an employee whether:

i) homosexuality should be allowed

ii) people should be allowed to renounce Islam

of all employees, and a section answer negatively, does that mean they can sack them without compensation due to the discrimination legal implications (i.e. the employee places the business at risk by holding views which will lead to a risk of legal action against the company). Or does it not pass the 'reasonable grounds for dismissal' test?

[Bossybabe]

Somethink just struck me.

If an employer asks an employee whether:

i) homosexuality should be allowed

ii) people should be allowed to renounce Islam

of all employees, and a section answer negatively, does that mean they can sack them without compensation due to the discrimination legal implications (i.e. the employee places the business at risk by holding views which will lead to a risk of legal action against the company). Or does it not pass the 'reasonable grounds for dismissal' test?

It would certainly call into question the employee's ability to work within its Equality & Diversity policies, and thus the law. However, I think the employer would have to wait until the law/policy was broken before taking action on dismissal.

[porca misèria]

I think an employer asking that kind of question is straying well outside what's allowed. So if they try and do anything (even if it's for very good reasons), the employee now has a weapon against them.

[MrPin]

I have never bean asked those questions!

[1929crash]

^^^ Exactly, why would they ask and why would an employee answer?

JP Morgan has done something very similar during the past few weeks.

But surely it is actions that matter? If an employee believes something that is discriminatory but acts in a non-discriminatory way then that is acceptable. Going further is, to say the least, sinister and totalitarian.

[1929crash]

I have never bean asked those questions!

It is only a matter of time.

[geezer466]

Why would they even need to ask?

Increasing numbers of employment contracts (currently hi end but bound to spread) demand access to your social media accounts as a condition of employment.

They can learn themselves all they want from that!!

[MrPin]

I'm not on facebonk or *********! I only appear here occasionally

[porca misèria]

But surely it is actions that matter? If an employee believes something that is discriminatory but acts in a non-discriminatory way then that is acceptable. Going further is, to say the least, sinister and totalitarian.

You mean like ACPO when they banned BNP membership from the police?

[for the avoidance of doubt, I agree entirely with what you wrote]

[wherebee]

You mean like ACPO when they banned BNP membership from the police?

[for the avoidance of doubt, I agree entirely with what you wrote]

I didn't know that!

I was thinking along those lines though - where an employer can ban membership of certain political/religious groups due to the beliefs and actions of those groups. For example, a school sacking a teacher who was a member of a pro-paedo group.

[DTMark]

I think an employer asking that kind of question is straying well outside what's allowed.

+1

[Riedquat]

You mean like ACPO when they banned BNP membership from the police?

[for the avoidance of doubt, I agree entirely with what you wrote]

I think there's a little bit of a difference in the way it's reasonable to treat people with various views who don't act on them and those that do, and joining a group that trumpets those views is acting on them. But in general I also agree, life is full of having to act with a bit of self-control.