Discussion moved from Employment Law Forum

[cupidstunt]

Do you really think the Employers really care about the equality act, they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue.

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Do you really think the Employers really care about the equality act, they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue.

CupidStunt, you are so very very wrong when you say "they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue" - Try telling that to the employers that have lost at tribunal for breach of equality act 2010 where they have had to compensate the employee, not hundreds of just a few thousands, but 10's of thousands, hundreds of thousands and in some very serious cases millions of pounds (1 was last year for a doctor that was hounded out of work at a hospital just for getting pregnant.

If you have no constructive legal advice on employment law (or respective laws to a persons thread) and only negative personal opinion, then keep it to yourself please! I noticed you recently lost an appeal for your own dismissal (Which you have appealed, and i wish you the best of luck with the appeal) after viewing your post history, a thread i have no been part of off or read in full. Your circumstances are different to Millymay's so please do not dilute this thread with opinion based on your own personal circumstances, just because you lost at tribunal, doesn't mean millymay would loose too. Hell you could till win at appeal anyway.

[cupidstunt]

Re: suspended from work

Oh dear, did I hit a nerve.

If you are going to quote my circumstances then slow down and read the past posts first, I haven't lost at a tribunal?

And I would think my case is very similar to this one, the employer doesn't care about the eq act infact if you keep waving it at them, they will try harder to get rid of you.

My experience and constructive advice is not to keep being told that you can count on the tribunal.

If you have union back up then yes it may be possible.

If you proceed your self then a small chance of a payout, can you get your job back...no.

using a barrister you will come even.

the big payouts are news because of what they are, they are not the norm.

Go and do something useful.........make the tea.

[bluebottle]

Re: suspended from work

CupidStunt, you are so very very wrong when you say "they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue" - Try telling that to the employers that have lost at tribunal for breach of equality act 2010 where they have had to compensate the employee, not hundreds of just a few thousands, but 10's of thousands, hundreds of thousands and in some very serious cases millions of pounds (1 was last year for a doctor that was hounded out of work at a hospital just for getting pregnant.

If you have no constructive legal advice on employment law (or respective laws to a persons thread) and only negative personal opinion, then keep it to yourself please! I noticed you recently lost an appeal for your own dismissal (Which you have appealed, and i wish you the best of luck with the appeal) after viewing your post history, a thread i have no been part of off or read in full. Your circumstances are different to Millymay's so please do not dilute this thread with opinion based on your own personal circumstances, just because you lost at tribunal, doesn't mean millymay would loose too. Hell you could till win at appeal anyway.

Totally agree about the financial cost to employers of ignoring the Equality Act 2010, TB.

In the case of Majrowski -v- Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Trust [2005], the employer was ordered to pay £250,000 and in the Michelak case, the damages awarded against the NHS Trust that employed the doctor TB refers to came to £4.1 million. Two managers involved were ordered to pay £20,000 and £30,000, respectively, out of their own pockets for their part in the bullying to which Dr Michelak was subjected.

As you will see, employers ignore the Equality Act 2010 at their peril. Not only could it bring their business to the edge of bankruptcy, it could also bring them to the edge of personal bankruptcy, if not, bankrupt them.

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Oh dear, did I hit a nerve.

If you are going to quote my circumstances then slow down and read the past posts first, I haven't lost at a tribunal?

And I would think my case is very similar to this one, the employer doesn't care about the eq act infact if you keep waving it at them, they will try harder to get rid of you.

My experience and constructive advice is not to keep being told that you can count on the tribunal.

If you have union back up then yes it may be possible.

If you proceed your self then a small chance of a payout, can you get your job back...no.

using a barrister you will come even.

the big payouts are news because of what they are, they are not the norm.

Go and do something useful.........make the tea.

First off all CupidStunt, i am one of the most experience employment advisers on LB, a lot of members can tell you that. Your first post in this thread didn't touch a nerve at all! I merely politely pointed out to you that whilst you lost your case and are appealing (its irrelevant if its tribunal or county court as the same laws apply and also irrelevant if its still at disciplinary stage) that there was no need for your opinionated comment, and that you were wrong.

Secondly, whilst i may have got the wrong impression about the current status of your issue with your employer. The fact you haven't even been to tribunal and are already of an negative opinion on the outcome, says to me that you are not, due to lack of Tribunal experience and Knowledge, in any position to question if taking it to tribunal as being worth it here on someone elses thread, in the manner that you did. That manner being to state that as an opinionated comment to this threads OP "Do you really think the Employers really care about the equality act, they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue."

Thirdly, out of all the employment issues i have help others with not a single one has been the same. Whilst some are familiar sounding, i.e discrimination the acts or discrimination, the evidence to support it and the back ground are never the same at all. You can not under any circumstances treat a case as being the same as a previous one no matter how similar they sound. Because at the end of the day they are not similar at all expect for the fact that one has been discriminated against, but that's where the similarities end (For example, no murder, no burglary is the same).

No one is saying to milly that she can win in tribunal, its largely a weapon to threaten the employer with if it comes to that. 90% of employment issues here on LB are settled amicably and successfully, with our help, between employee and employer. But the fact remains she has clearly been discriminated against and once we have enough evidence built up against the employer, then Tribunal or court will be like pissing in the wind for Milly, that's how easy it will be for her to win if she had to go down that route.

End of the day, your opinionated comment was based on your own negative opinion that steams from your own worries about your own situation, It was not a constructive comment that could be supported by facts. As the facts regarding tribunals acting in favour of employees are, as confirmed by Bluebottle, quite clear. So its not a case of "they know its not worthwhile for the employee to pursue". Its actually a case of "They know they are in the shit when the employee pursues breaches of the equality act"!!

And lastly, as for your last comment - Well first of all that's a form discrimination its self, as you have discriminated against me by singling me out to make the Tea, just because its my username. That's a bit like me telling you to go back to the circus and carry on playing with your bow and arrow!!

And for the record, you do not want to start an argument with me, especially when it is just because you have a negative opinion as a result of the out come of your own disciplinary. So my advice to you in future is to not post negative opinionated comments on threads discussing other peoples problems, just because they sound the same (When no situation is the same) to your own situation. And my second bit of advice to you is, don't piss off the people that have the knowledge and ability to help you, such as myself! And i was in fact, considering reading your thread, since i hadn't seen it before today, in order to help you. But now after your arrogant reply and complete lack of respect towards me. Then you better damn well know how to grovel when apologising, otherwise you can forget it! Which is a shame as there's only myself and a couple of others (Who will likely have seen you disrespect and attitude towards me) here that may have been able to help you. Whether the others help you now is up to them.

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Totally agree about the financial cost to employers of ignoring the Equality Act 2010, TB.

In the case of Majrowski -v- Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Trust [2005], the employer was ordered to pay £250,000 and in the Michelak case, the damages awarded against the NHS Trust that employed the doctor TB refers to came to £4.1 million. Two managers involved were ordered to pay £20,000 and £30,000, respectively, out of their own pockets for their part in the bullying to which Dr Michelak was subjected.

As you will see, employers ignore the Equality Act 2010 at their peril. Not only could it bring their business to the edge of bankruptcy, it could also bring them to the edge of personal bankruptcy, if not, bankrupt them.

Cheers Bluebottle that was indeed the case i was referring too (Michelak) and thank you for providing the Majrowski -v- Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Trust [2005] to show a clear comparison on the damages/compensation issues in both cases. Though obviously the 2005 case was not based on the equality act 2010 since the act was not in force then, but it does show just how much more seriously the subject of equality is treated by tribunals, as made clear by the difference in the awarded amounts in each case.

[bluebottle]

Re: suspended from work

You're welcome, TB.

The Majrowski case was brought under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 for homophobic bullying in a major London hospital. As you correctly point out, the Equality Act 2010 was not in force then, but it does illustrate that employers do need to take bullying and harassment in the workplace very seriously. The Michelak case, on the other hand, involved racism, sex discrimination and other issues that fell within the scope of the Equality Act 2010. Dr Michelak is Polish.

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

You're welcome, TB.

The Majrowski case was brought under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 for homophobic bullying in a major London hospital. As you correctly point out, the Equality Act 2010 was not in force then, but it does illustrate that employers do need to take bullying and harassment in the workplace very seriously. The Michelak case, on the other hand, involved racism, sex discrimination and other issues that fell within the scope of the Equality Act 2010. Dr Michelak is Polish.

Exactly mate, and the Michelak one (under the equality act 2010) was the £4.1million pay out in damages one! Which says all that needs to be said in regards to whether its worth employees pursuing through tribunal doesn't it mate?

Its worth noting that if the equality act had been in force in 2005 that the Majorwski case would have been dealt with under the equality act 2010 due sexual orientation being a protected characteristic under the equality act.

[bluebottle]

Re: suspended from work

I think we can only hazard a guess as to what the damages would be if the Majrowski case had been heard following the Equality Act 2010 coming into force. I agree totally with what you are saying about employees pursuing employers who feel the Equality Act 2010 does not apply to them or see it as an inconvenience or irritation. The Michelak case is and should be regarded as a wake-up call to ALL employers to take equality matters seriously and not treat them as a joke.

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Exactly mate, if any employer is stupid enough to think its not worth an employees time to pursue, well god help them because their bank balance would be in for a serious shock! And yes, at a guess i think Majrowski would have got significantly less than Michelak was awarded, if it had been heard under the equality act, but still it would be a damn site more than what they got in 2005, maybe 5-7 hundred grand maximum, given it was an NHS Trust that was the employer.

[cupidstunt]

Re: suspended from work

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz as you can tell, no sleep lost over your reluctance to help me out.

I am not worthy.

As a point of interest, how do these two wins compare to the many losses and minor payouts of a couple of grand and I wonder what the legal costs were.

So I'm not allowed an opinion on an open forum in case I upset someone with their head up their arse.

I'm grateful to you for taking time out to educate me in between saving the world single-handed.

I will watch this with interest to see how far it progresses beyond the employer offering £ 3000 or 4000 to save having to go and waste time in a tribunal.

Glad I pissed you off ;-)

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Grow the Hell Up

Seriously, do you think anyone is going to want to help you having seen the clear show of disrespect you have shown myself. Your like a kid, whose thrown their toys out of the pram all because mummy didn't get you what you wanted.

Yeah your negativity and attitude to the tribunal system and employment laws stems from your recently being dismissed. But that was not my doing, i don't make up the law's or the system or determine legal fees for tribunal, and By the way if not often an employee that loses at tribunal is made to pay the employers full legal fees, nor if you represent yourself (which is not hard) would you have any to pay. Nor am i responsible for you being dismissed from your job.

You say thousands loose at tribunal, but you would have no way of knowing the ratio of win and losses as they are not reported only the big cases like the two mentioned are. Yes people loose, that's a fact of life, but that's largely because they are 1 over confident whilst lacking true knowledge on employment laws or advice of someone who does. 2 do not have the evidence to proof their claim or because their claim had no basis at all.

Yes the employer will likely try and settle before it goes to tribunal as the majority do, but 3 or 4 grand from a local authority, i'd expect Milly would get a lot more than that, especially when the fact she is unlikely to work in government roles or local authority roles again and her lost potential future earnings are taken into account.

As for saving the world single handed, i never claimed to do so or to be doing so, in fact i said i was one of a off three people here that could have helped you and i quote "Which is a shame as there's only myself and a couple of others (Who will likely have seen you disrespect and attitude towards me) here that may have been able to help you" - I was therefore pointing out to you that there is less than a handful of people here on the site that could have helped you and i am one of the most experienced here, which am sure others can vouch for. Or do you seriously believe there are ten's or hundred's of people well versed in employment law here on LB or any other forum!!

Fact is, as a result of your attitude, this thread that belongs to milly has been distracted from and i hope for milly's sake that your attitude and comments have not put her off fighting for her rights. Therefore please leave this thread and allow myself and others to get on with providing milly the help she needs. By all means watch the thread, but keep your thoughts to yourself, or set up your own new thread to post them.

As for pissing me off - Ohhh trust me your not even close to pissing me off, in fact am very relaxed right now, but trust me you will know about it if you do piss my off, and am certain others know perfectly well what i mean when i say that. And for the record i have reported your last two posts for being disrespectful, full of attitude, non constructive (serving no benefit to the OP at all). To me, you mean nothing at all Cupid, your just someone that feels hard done by, and you may well have every right to feel that way if you were wrongly dismissed, but you appear to be taking it out on myself and i am the last person you want to take it out on. If anything cupid, you have just shown to me that your just a bully. But if you really want to push it, thats up to you. But i (and no doubt others here too) strongly advise you do not.

[Amethyst]

Re: suspended from work

Okay think that's enough bickering for one evening. I'm moving the posts off of this thread.


DONE and CLOSED.

[cupidstunt]

Re: suspended from work

Millymay, better listen to the almighty teaboy, otherwise you will know it, yet another key board warrior ;-)

teaboy the more you say the more you get wrong, I realise now that you are the one throwing your toys around, I think you need to take some of your own advice. I can't even be bothered to explain your mistakes.

the truth hurts so go report me and get my posts removed and I'm the one that needs to grow up? millymay would be well advised to read your disclaimer and remember the rule not to believe every thing on the internet

[teaboy2]

Re: suspended from work

Actually CupidStunt, i'am the one with vast legal knowledge and experience with employment issues. Your the one with a chip on your shoulder is that because no one gave you any advice on your thread or because you truly are just a disrespectful idiot with an attitude. I'm certainly not the keyboard warrior, i am merely standing up to you in response to the disrespect and attitude you have shown and directed at myself. Yeah i say a lot, especially when offended, but that's to get my point across, not because am a Keyboard warrior as that's clearly youself.

But like all good keyboard warriors, instead of you backing up anything you have said, when confronted, about Tribunals etc or about myself and my advice (alleged mistakes you mentioned above) you have not provided anything to back up your assertions or opinion. Instead you change tactic to making personal comments and innuendos about myself and act as if your in pole position in this dispute. When really your just looking like a complete idiot in front of everyone reading this thread.

You destroyed millys thread earlier, those posts were removed to restore the thread to where it was when milly left it. Yet here you are again, with absolutely no regard whatsoever for milly and her employment problem, again destroying her thread with your nonsensical drivel.

You were wrong in your original post (now removed) and your still wrong. You don't have anything to substantuiate what you originally said about employers not taking the equality act serious as they know employees won't bother or can't pursue it, or that thousands more loose breaches of equality act claims at tribunal then those that win (Simply because there is no public register)

You say you can't be bothered to explain my mistakes - Sorry but please do so, as i would love to know how someone with no experience in dealing with employment laws, or employment tribunals for that matter can say i have made mistakes?

I reported your posts because they were non-constructive, disrespectful towards myself (one of only 3, maybe 4 people on LB that is able to help you) and your downright pathetic attitude. Yes i have now read your thread, and if you provided more information regarding events and about the alleged discrimination you may have got the help you needed.

Speaking of truth hurts, well the truth is you lost your job, you feel bitter because you didn't receive the help you wanted (yeah as if we all have magic wands) yet you came to us with the provision of vague information and little details in your thread, and you have taken it out on me in this thread, because you jealous that Milly is getting the advice that you didn't get - That's the real truth Cupid, and i think every one who saw your earlier posts, which VIP members (yes am a VIP member working groups to be accurate, i wonder why i have that title cupid) can still see in the lamppost section of the thread, will agree with me and not with you!

I really pity you Cupid as its clear your acting out of your own self pity. But if you acted like this to your now ex-employer or colleagues then no wonder they sacked you - I would too! As your clearly are ungrateful, disrespectful and inconsiderate and thinking of nobody but your self and your own needs. And employers can bring all your past actions and failures up as part of their defense against your tribunal claim, so your probably best not taking your ex-employer to tribunal if you acted same way to your employer and colleagues as you have towards myself today.

Grow Up. Learn to accept responsibility for your own actions and inaction's (leaving it so late and providing little to no details for anyone to help in your own thread) and get out of this thread.

As for my disclaimer, your right milly would be wise to read it because i am an employer and the site team here, along with certain members of the site and people i have helped, know full well what my business and its name is. As for not believing everything you read on the internet, well that fits perfectly when it comes to reading the rubbish you have been posting. And who are you exactly, ohh that's right, your a person that came here yourself seeking employment advice, you didn't get the advice, due to not providing enough details and leaving it so late, and now your having a go at myself one of LB's 3-4 most experienced and knowledgeable advisers on employment law who's currently trying to help Milly (whom you clearly have no consideration for) the OP of this thread with her issue of discrimination at work - Which is certainly not the same as yours!!

So Cupid, who the hell are you to question me?! Because to me your no body but a bitter, self pitying, disrespectful idiot with a chip on your shoulder, that knows nothing about the ins and outs of employment tribunals or employment laws.