AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

rt1111/14111daV

10th June 2010, Page 28
10th June 2010
Page 28
Page 29
Page 28, 10th June 2010 — rt1111/14111daV
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

New equality legislation comes into force in October operators should ensure their employment practices meet the new requirements.

Maras: Patric CLIEloarie One of the Last acts of the Labour Government before dissolving Parliament was to ensure that the Equality Act became law Its measures come into force in October and it could have a major impact on the way employers recruit staff and how they treat them in the workplace. It even gives employers a responsibility to ensure that a third party does not discriminate against employees. This could mean that a truck driver visiting a customer could hold his boss accountable if he faces discrimination while on those premises.

The act is intended to simplify the law on race, sex. disability and religious discrimination, bringing sanctions and rights together under one piece of legislation.

Changes include a new 'justification' test where employers must meet a higher threshold to justify their actions if they dismiss someone, particularly if the employee has a disability. They will have to prove that the action is "a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim".

Permitted purposes The act will discourage employers from asking about an applicant's health, including disability, at the interview stage, unless the enquiries are for particular permitted purposes.This will apply to the application form, medical questionnaires and questions at the interview.

Permitted purposes include establishing whether the employer must make adjustments to allow the applicant to carry out the work: establishing whether the applicant will be able to carry out a function intrinsic to the work: and monitoring diversity. Guidance for transport companies will need to take into account the fact that HGV drivers are required to undergo regular medical examinations after the age of 45 and that certain conditions, such as epilepsy and poor eyesight. preclude work in the profession.

Julie Sillito. employment solicitor at Aaron & Partners in Chester, believes that asking questions about a driver's health might not in itself be discriminatory. She says: -Employers will he able to ask about an applicant's ability to carry out functions intrinsic to the job."

However, she cautions thc industry to he careful: -The provisions do not come into force until October and we need to wait and see what case law shows,The coalition government has the power to change provisions. "The Conservatives were against this act, in particular gender pay reporting which requires firms with more than 250 employees to audit pay levels."

Ruth Pon, director of employment affairs at the Road Haulage Association. says: "We are awaiting guidance. Employers have to be careful what questions the ■ but. one of the positive things that can be done with

medical information is to make reasonable adjustments for applicants with a disability."

She disagrees with the proposal to extend the time limit for tribunal claims."lbree months is long enough," she says, but she does support the aims of the act. "It's a good thing to bring discrimination law under one roof-some laws are 40 years old and needed reviewing."

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is responsible for ensuring that H(.; V drivers meet vocational health requirements, which include a medical report on first application. We will continue to ask the medical questions because we are required to do so under Ell law," says a DVLA spokesman, "There will still be a medical requirement for drivers over 45 to have an examination up to every five years.

Employers can be held responsible for harassment of their employees by third parties, such as customers or suppliers. This applies when an employer knows that an employee has been harassed on at least two other occasions by a third party. Armed with this knowledge, an employer must take steps to end the harassment.

Decisions published online Employment tribunal decisions are likely to appear on the intemet. At present only Employment Appeal Tribunal decisions are online,The European and Human Rights Commission believes the results of discrimination cases should he openly available because reputation is important in influencing employers' decisions to adopt good equality practice.

Not yet adopted into the act is a recommendation that the time limit for bringing an employment tribunal claim should be extended from three to six months.This is intended to help those who do not know their rights and allow extra time for the informal resolution of disputes.

For those who claim victimisation, the government has removed the need to compare treatment with someone else. It used to be necessary to prove the victim had been treated less favourably than how someone else would he treated. Now there is a right not to he subject to a detriment, as a result of bringing a discrimination claim, for example.

Also new is an extension of powers for employment

tribunals sitting in judgement on discrimination eases. At the moment they can only make a recommendation that benefits the individual who brought the claim if they have left the company the tribunal will not usually make a recommendation.

nd e r the new law, tribunals can recommend that certain actions are taken within a specified period. These could benefit the wider workforce and prevent similar types of discrimination in the future. Although not legally binding, a failure to act could result in a tougher judgment if another claim is made. Eventually the judgements and recommendations will be on the Tribunal Service's website so that previous recommendations can be traced.

Not being acted on yet is the idea of representative actions. These would allow unions or the Equality and Human Rights Commission to pursue cases for a group of claimants as a single claim. Before this goes ahead, further consultation will follow.

A proposal that employers should anticipate the needs of disabled applicants they have not yet recruited was rejected. An example might be a traffic office set up to suit disabled applicants. The government believes that, while companies should factor disability considerations into all aspects of their operations. it is more important that adjustments are tailored to the individual. II


comments powered by Disqus