Latest posts:
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
The implications could be very serious and I personally have not come across any mention of changes to legislation connected with what you mention. I would have thought running, or attempting to run, such checks without consultation or consent could leave you open to some sort of civil action for violation of privacy/human rights etc. I could be entirely wrong but I think caution is the watchword here. I would be interested to know what others think.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Discrimination is not "in the eye of the beholder". Discrimination is what the law says it is. So Kuang Lim's question remains valid and unanswered - What piece of discrimination legislation specifically prohibits hiring or not hiring someone for the way they look. If, as I think, we are talking about genral appearance here - whether they wear a suit or not, whether they are scruffy or smart - not colour, gender etc.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Someone has got this completely wrong! You camnnot be charged with manslaughter under any section of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
If employers or their organizations are hoping for one moment that they will get a change in the law so that they can quiz women about their future reproductive plans they are living in cloud cuckoo land wouldn't you say?
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Jeffery Thomas puts it best and I agree entirely with his comments. Positive discrimination is discrimination nonetheless and just as reprehensible as any other variety. Harman is mistaken in many of her policies and a liability. She and those of her ilk must be vigorously resisted. The fact that people like her can rise to such high office is a sad indictment of our system. This is what you get when you elect governments of upper middle class liberals who are slaves to their own political correctness. Men who agree with these feminist neo liberals are fools by the way. This sort of proposal is really a type of fascism. What New Labour is about is forcing people to think and do as they do.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Nanny state in as much as one cannot seem to build, eat, drink, walk, swim or do anything in fact in recent years without having to get some sort of officially sanctioned licence, permit, permission or form first.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Many campaigned to have penalties for individuals included in the Act but the Government simply would not entertain the idea. As we have seen over the years New Labour fawn over business and will do nothing to upset businessmen and women. Disgraceful from the Party that was brought into existence to protect ordinary working people.
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Sounds good but they rarely enforced the existing legislation - why should this be any different?
Rate this!
Nicholas Batten
Member - 13 posts
Is there no end to the "Nanny" State?
0 (0)
