|
|
Post by sheepy on Aug 20, 2023 14:32:07 GMT
You don't fancy taking on Dr Gadaw then, with your law knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 14:58:14 GMT
They will agree with Dr Gadaw if it is established that the employer is discriminating against people holding Christian beliefs. Also the technical argument put forward by Dr Gadow about the correct terminology and use of pronouns in a Court of Law has unarguable validity. Not my area of law. But, to the best of my recollection, an employer may dismiss an employee who refuses to follow a lawful instruction. The question then becomes: is it lawful for a teaching institution to instruct an employee to teach his or her course in a manner that reflects that institution's inclusivity policies? I should think it is. As for the technical points Dr. Gadow raises: even if she is correct in her claim that the university's inclusivity policy will result in providing students with an unhelpful view of court practices, she cannot decide to refuse to teach the course in the manner instructed by her employer on that basis. It simply isn't her decision to make. If the students are disadvantaged as a result of the teaching methods Dr. Gadow has been instructed to apply, it is for those students to take action against the university for failing to provide a service to the standard required by consumer protection laws. |
|
|
|
Post by walterpaisley on Aug 20, 2023 15:10:39 GMT
Bear in mind that we're only hearing one side of this story.
While there's a complaint/disciplinary procudure underway, the OU can't go into any detail, because the media is neither the place, nor is now the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by seniorcitizen007 on Aug 20, 2023 16:07:09 GMT
Who knows? Maybe we'll end up with anti-woke journalists being prosecuted and newspapers being closed down for their woke opposition?
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 17:19:51 GMT
Who knows? Maybe we'll end up with anti-woke journalists being prosecuted and newspapers being closed down for their woke opposition? How do you think the GB News management would react if one of their employees refused to follow their instructions? Do they think they'd simply overlook it? I'm quite confident they'd do exactly what the OU did. There's nothing new about an employer's right to dismiss for an employee's refusal to implement policy or follow instruction. The right didn't suddenly appear with the emergence of 'woke' culture. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 20, 2023 17:49:06 GMT
They will agree with Dr Gadaw if it is established that the employer is discriminating against people holding Christian beliefs. Also the technical argument put forward by Dr Gadow about the correct terminology and use of pronouns in a Court of Law has unarguable validity. Dr Gadaw also pointed out that not holding a gender identity belief was protected under the Equality Act 2010. She's laughing all the way to the bank, if the lefty woke fundamentalists who run the Open University have any sense they will attempt to reach an out of court settlement, hopefully Dr Gadaw tells em to get stuffed and goes to trial. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 18:00:12 GMT
They will agree with Dr Gadaw if it is established that the employer is discriminating against people holding Christian beliefs. Also the technical argument put forward by Dr Gadow about the correct terminology and use of pronouns in a Court of Law has unarguable validity. Dr Gadaw also pointed out that not holding a gender identity belief was protected under the Equality Act 2010. She's laughing all the way to the bank, if the lefty woke fundamentalists who run the Open University have any sense they will attempt to reach an out of court settlement, hopefully Dr Gadaw tells em to get stuffed and goes to trial. Interesting. As far as I can see, the Equality Act 2010 states that someone may not be discriminated against for their religion or belief. Assuming Dr. Gadaw's views constitute a 'belief' for the purpose of the act, it is still difficult to see how she can avail of it. She wasn't discriminated against for what she believed, but rather for refusing to follow her employer's instructions. Her employers couldn't have cared less what her beliefs were if she simply followed procedures prescribed by them. What am I missing here, Red? By the way, the average damages award for unfair dismissal is £13,000. Hardly a king's ransom. In fact, it's unlikely to cover her losses. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 20, 2023 18:03:37 GMT
Dr Gadaw also pointed out that not holding a gender identity belief was protected under the Equality Act 2010. She's laughing all the way to the bank, if the lefty woke fundamentalists who run the Open University have any sense they will attempt to reach an out of court settlement, hopefully Dr Gadaw tells em to get stuffed and goes to trial. Interesting. As far as I can see, the Equality Act 2010 states that someone may not be discriminated against for their religion or belief. Assuming Dr. Gadaw's views constitute a 'belief' for the purpose of the act, it is still difficult to see how she can avail of it. She wasn't discriminated against for what she believed, but rather for refusing to follow her employer's instructions. Her employers couldn't have cared less what her beliefs were if she simply followed procedures prescribed by them. What am I missing here, Red?I'm fairly sure this wont be the first time you've heard this, but it's called common sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 18:05:23 GMT
Interesting. As far as I can see, the Equality Act 2010 states that someone may not be discriminated against for their religion or belief. Assuming Dr. Gadaw's views constitute a 'belief' for the purpose of the act, it is still difficult to see how she can avail of it. She wasn't discriminated against for what she believed, but rather for refusing to follow her employer's instructions. Her employers couldn't have cared less what her beliefs were if she simply followed procedures prescribed by them. What am I missing here, Red?I'm fairly sure this wont be the first time you've heard this, but it's called common sense. As I said, this isn't my area of law. I can't see any basis for a claim under the Equality Act. Have you read something from an informed source? Can you enlighten us? |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 20, 2023 18:05:59 GMT
Dr Gadaw also pointed out that not holding a gender identity belief was protected under the Equality Act 2010. She's laughing all the way to the bank, if the lefty woke fundamentalists who run the Open University have any sense they will attempt to reach an out of court settlement, hopefully Dr Gadaw tells em to get stuffed and goes to trial. Interesting. As far as I can see, the Equality Act 2010 states that someone may not be discriminated against for their religion or belief. Assuming Dr. Gadaw's views constitute a 'belief' for the purpose of the act, it is still difficult to see how she can avail of it. She wasn't discriminated against for what she believed, but rather for refusing to follow her employer's instructions. Her employers couldn't have cared less what her beliefs were if she simply followed procedures prescribed by them. What am I missing here, Red? By the way, the average damages award for unfair dismissal is £13,000. Hardly a king's ransom. In fact, it's unlikely to cover her losses. An addendum to your edit. I suspect Dr Gadaw's reasons for going to court has little to do with monetary gain. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 18:07:49 GMT
Interesting. As far as I can see, the Equality Act 2010 states that someone may not be discriminated against for their religion or belief. Assuming Dr. Gadaw's views constitute a 'belief' for the purpose of the act, it is still difficult to see how she can avail of it. She wasn't discriminated against for what she believed, but rather for refusing to follow her employer's instructions. Her employers couldn't have cared less what her beliefs were if she simply followed procedures prescribed by them. What am I missing here, Red? By the way, the average damages award for unfair dismissal is £13,000. Hardly a king's ransom. In fact, it's unlikely to cover her losses. An addendum to your edit. I suspect Dr Gadaw's reasons for going to court has little to do with monetary gain. You said she would 'be laughing all the way to the bank'. I don't think a damages award that is unlikely to cover her losses warrants that remark. It's just common sense. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 20, 2023 18:14:49 GMT
An addendum to your edit. I suspect Dr Gadaw's reasons for going to court has little to do with monetary gain. You said she would 'be laughing all the way to the bank'. I don't think a damages award that is unlikely to cover her losses warrants that remark. It's just common sense. Oh ffs Einy, it's a figure of speech, a metaphor. Grow up there's a good boy, no apologies if I disrespected your chosen pronoun btw. |
|
|
|
Post by sheepy on Aug 20, 2023 18:17:02 GMT
You said she would 'be laughing all the way to the bank'. I don't think a damages award that is unlikely to cover her losses warrants that remark. It's just common sense. Oh ffs Einy, it's a figure of speech, a metaphor. Grow up there's a good boy, no apologies if I disrespected your chosen pronoun btw. Maybe a case will set a new precedence. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Aug 20, 2023 18:22:05 GMT
Lets face it they have enough to choose from. Our schools, colledges and universaties are full with the lefy woke arseholes.. Fury as Just Stop Oil eco mob is recruiting university professors for campus campaign
|
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Aug 20, 2023 18:22:30 GMT
You said she would 'be laughing all the way to the bank'. I don't think a damages award that is unlikely to cover her losses warrants that remark. It's just common sense. Oh ffs Einy, it's a figure of speech, a metaphor. Grow up there's a good boy, no apologies if I disrespected your chosen pronoun btw. So, she won't be vindicated with a damages award, then. That was the subtext of your remark. Glad we agree. Of course, the subtext of the GB News (LOL! at 'News') piece was that there is a sinister new thing called 'woke' that can cause people to lose their job. Well, that's not the case. Employers have always had the right to dismiss employees for refusing to follow their instructions. There's absolutely nothing new there. If one of GB News (Lol! again) presenters refused to follow management's instruction on policy, they too would get the boot. You're an idiot if you think otherwise. |
|
