Advancing Debate about Religion or Belief, Equality and Human Rights: Grounds for Optimism?

Donald, Alice

doi:10.1093/ojlr/rwt002

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In relation to cases involving uniform policies or dress codes, the outcome may be slightly different for individuals such as Eweida or Azmi, but not necessarily for all potential claimants, as the work context would be highly relevant. Recent research by the EHRC also suggested that there was a broad consensus by the research participants that a reasonable accommodation should be made on the basis of a person’s religion or belief where there is no conflict with the equally protected rights of others (Donald, 2012). Although a specific legal duty of reasonable accommodation was not proposed to these research participants, there was a presumption in favour of the accommodation of religion, even if the operation of an accommodation was acknowledged as very fact-specific.…”

Section: Should Religion Be ‘Reasonably Accommodated’ and What Would mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religion: Is this a better way of advancing equality in cases of religious discrimination?

Griffiths

2016

International Journal of Discrimination and the Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Freedom of religion and the manifestation of religious belief can clash with working life in a number of ways, including time away from work for religious observance, conflicts over religious clothing and jewellery in an employer's dress code or a request for a variation of duties based on a particular religious belief. Guidance issued by the Equality and Human Rights Commission following Eweida and others v. UK [2013] 57 EHRR 8 seems to suggest that employers in Great Britain should consider the 'reasonable accommodation' of religion in the workplace and, in particular, how an individual chooses to manifest that religious belief. Subsequently, there has been much debate about whether this is a better way of dealing with religious discrimination cases than the current complex legal framework of direct and indirect discrimination in the Equality Act 2010. Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010 already allows for reasonable adjustments to be made to working practices and the physical working environment for disabled employees. Should this duty be expanded to include religion and what would be the consequences and impact of such an accommodation or adjustment on the employment relationship?

show abstract

Section: Should Religion Be ‘Reasonably Accommodated’ and What Would mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religion: Is this a better way of advancing equality in cases of religious discrimination?

Griffiths

2016

International Journal of Discrimination and the Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the issues examined by Johnson and Vanderbeck have been covered in other academic sources. For example, the religious exceptions under the Equality Act have also been discussed by Sandberg (2011), Donald et al (2012), and (since the publication of the book under review) Edge and Vickers (2015). The analysis by Johnson and Vanderbeck (pp.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Book Review: Law, Religion and Homosexuality

Perfect

2016

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The God “Dilution”? Religion, Discrimination and the Case for Reasonable Accommodation

Gibson¹

2013

C.L.J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anti-discrimination complaints by religious employees have constructed seemingly intractable conflicts. The United Kingdom courts have resolved these disputes by diluting individual religious liberty, particularly when determining questions of disadvantage and proportionality under indirect discrimination. This article explores an alternative UK anti-discrimination claim route for religious employees, namely an employer duty of reasonable accommodation. A comparative analysis outlines the corresponding Canadian duty. This model is applied to UK employment cases featuring indirect religious discrimination, specifically those claims which formed the recent applications in Eweida and Others v UK. It is suggested that adoption of the Canadian model be considered: its nuanced approach to proportionality is particularly instructive. Whilst such a UK duty could prove controversial, it would cohere with both normative theory in law and religion and conceptual understanding of anti-discrimination law. Moreover, reasonable accommodation's individualised focus should be acclaimed; it need not compromise collective notions of religious liberty.

show abstract

Advancing Debate about Religion or Belief, Equality and Human Rights: Grounds for Optimism?

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religion: Is this a better way of advancing equality in cases of religious discrimination?

The ‘reasonable accommodation’ of religion: Is this a better way of advancing equality in cases of religious discrimination?

Book Review: Law, Religion and Homosexuality

The God “Dilution”? Religion, Discrimination and the Case for Reasonable Accommodation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About