Equality Bill
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Liberties a History of Human Rights in Canada
TAKING LIBERTIES A HISTORY OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN CANADA Edited by David Goutor and Stephen Heathorn OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries. Published in Canada by Oxford University Press 8 Sampson Mews, Suite 204, Don Mills, Ontario M3C 0H5 Canada www.oupcanada.com Copyright © David Goutor and Stephen Heathorn 2013 Contributors retain copyright for their contributions The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Permissions Department at the address above or through the following url: www.oupcanada.com/permission/permission_request.php Every effort has been made to determine and contact copyright holders. In the case of any omissions, the publisher will be pleased to make suitable acknowledgement in future editions. Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Taking liberties : a history of human rights in Canada / edited by David Goutor and Stephen Heathorn. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-19-900479-9 (bound) 1. -
“Brexit and NI Employment Law – a Proposal for an NI- Specific Framework to Defend Workers’ EU Rights?” Paper by Ciaran White
1 ‘Brexiting and Rights: Discussion seminar on the human rights and equality implications of the EU referendum’, MAC Belfast, 27th September 2016 “Brexit and NI Employment Law – a proposal for an NI- specific framework to defend workers’ EU rights?” Paper by Ciaran White Abstract One of the many issues that gives rise to concern arising from the ‘Brexit’ vote is what it will all mean for those labour law rights that have been generated or influenced by EU law. Labour Lawyers recognise freely that EU law has had a considerable influence on the development of UK employment law: prior to 1973 it was still quite common for lawyers to describe the discipline as the ‘Law of Master and Servant’, reflecting its 19th century Victorian origins. Over that period, a wide range of EU directives setting out employment- related rights and entitlements have been promulgated. These include the Acquired Rights Directive, the Pregnant Workers’ Directive, Part-Time and Fixed Term Workers’ Directive, the Parental Leave Directive, the Working Time Directive, the Employment Equality and Equal treatment Directives, to name some. Many of these have found their expression in NI law as separate NI enactments. Some examples are the Working Time Regulations (Northern Ireland), Agency Workers Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011, Part-time Workers etc… Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002, but the range of NI-specific EU-generated legislation is quite extensive. What will post-Brexit NI employment law look like and what will happen this 40-year-plus corpus of employment rights? What will be the status of past case law of the Court of Justice, and will future case law be relevant where EU-derived rights are retained? What will happen those rights that have been implemented by way of an UK Act of Parliament, such as the Equal Pay Act, if those Acts are repealed? The Assembly has devolved competence in the field of employment law and so is free to chart its own course, distinct from that of the rest of the UK. -
Equal Pay Act 1970 (Repealed)
Status: Point in time view as at 01/04/1991. This version of this Act contains provisions that are not valid for this point in time. Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Equal Pay Act 1970 (repealed). (See end of Document for details) Equal Pay Act 1970 1970 CHAPTER 41 An Act to prevent discrimination, as regards terms and conditions of employment, between men and women. [29th May 1970] Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 This Act is in the form in which it is set out in Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (c. 65, SIF 106:1), Sch. 1 Pt. II, with subsequent amendments. Missing provisions without commentary reflect the presentation of the text in 1975 c. 65. Power to modify Act conferred (7.2.1994) by 1993 c. 48, s. 118(4); S.I. 1994/86, art. 2 Power to modify Act conferred (4.12.1995 for the purpose only of authorising the making of regulations, 1.1.1996 for all other purposes) by 1995 c. 26, s. 63(5) (with s. 121(5)); S.I. 1995/3104, art. 2(2) Power to modify Act conferred (4.12.1995 for the purpose only of authorising the making of regulations, 1.1.1996 for all other purposes) by 1995 c. 26, s. 66(4) (with s. 121(5)); S.I. 1995/3104, art. 2(2) Act restricted (22.8.1996) by 1996 c. 17, ss. 21(1)(a)(2)(3), 46 (with s. 38) Act applied (with modifications) (1.1.1996) by S.I. -
Comparative Study of Anti-Discrimination Laws of the UK, the United States of America and India
ISSN 2039-2117 (online) Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Vol 7 No 3 S2 ISSN 2039-9340 (print) MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy May 2016 Comparative Study of Anti-Discrimination Laws of the UK, the United States of America and India Amir Hossein Amirkahni Associate Professor in Payame Nour University, Tehran Reza Heydari Sheikh Tabghi MA Student, Public Administration, Payame Nour, Western Tehran Doi:10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n3s2p96 Abstract The issue of legal prohibition of discrimination is important because «high and positive correlation exists between the sense of political equality and belief in legitimacy of govenrment. This relationship guarantees the meaning that acceptance and confirming the legitimacy of the government realizes when the state and its Statesmen respect the principles of equality »(Yousefi, 2004). Additionally, battle against discrimination in society leads to increased participation of social groups in managing social affairs and this by itself leads to increased national cohesion and progress in the country. This paper compares the laws against discrimination in the countries of India, The Unites States of America and The United Kingdom with regards to historical and social background, sources of anti-discrimination laws, how to identify the grounds of discrimination, multiple discriminations, coverage and how to apply affirmative action. Keywords: Discrimination, Equality, Law, United Kingdom, United States of America, India 1. Introduction Discrimination means different behavior with individuals because of what they are or believe in. Discrimination aims at the heart of humanity. We all have the right to be treated equally, regardless of our race, ethnicity, nationality, class, caste, religion, belief, sex, language, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, health or other status. -
The Secularisation of the British Constitution
The Secularisation of the British Constitution 1 September 2012 Reporter Ecclesiastical Law Journal, 14, 371-399 Length: 16964 words Author: Julian Rivers, Professor of Jurisprudence, University of Bristol Law School Text In recent years, the relationship between law and religion has been subject to increased scholarly interest. In part this is the result of new laws protecting religious liberty and non-discrimination, and it may be that overall levels of litigation have increased as well. In all this activity, there are signs that the relationship between law and religion is changing. While unable to address every matter of detail, this article seeks to identify the underlying themes and trends. It starts by suggesting that the constitutional settlement achieved by the end of the nineteenth century has often been overlooked, religion only appearing in the guise of inadequately theorised commitments to individual liberty and equality. The article then considers the role of multiculturalism in promoting recent legal changes. However, the new commitment to multiculturalism cannot explain a number of features of the law: the minimal impact of the Human Rights Act 1998, the uncertain effect of equality legislation, an apparent rise in litigation in established areas of law and religion, and some striking cases in which acts have been found to be unlawful in surprising ways. In contrast, the article proposes a new secularisation thesis. The law is coming to treat religions as merely recreational and trivial. This has the effect of reducing the significance of religion as a matter of conscience, as legal system and as a context for public service. -
Fundamental Rights in the United Kingdom: the Law and the British Constitution*
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: THE LAW AND THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION* ANTHONY LESTERt I. INTRODUCTION I am honoured to have been invited to give this lecture and more grateful than words can express. It is a daunting invitation, especially when one recalls the demanding standards of the Owen J. Roberts Memorial Lectureship and the distinguished character of my predecessors. And it is a particular privilege for an Englishman-who is not a judge, a statesman, or a professor, but a practitioner at the English Bar-to have been asked to lecture in this historic birthplace of the Declaration of Indepen- dence during the year of the Bicentennial celebrations. I believe that Mr. Justice Roberts would have been in- terested by my theme. In his judicial capacity, he was a member of a divided Court that was called upon to reconcile the constitu- tional guarantees of personal liberty both with the proper alloca- tion of power between the federal government and the states of the Union, and with the imperatives of a great modern industrial nation. His judicial experience would surely have made him in- terested in the way in which we, in the United Kingdom, have wrestled with analogous constitutional and legal problems, with- out a written constitution or a binding Bill of Rights. And his work for international federation and Atlantic union, after his retirement from the Supreme Court, indicates that he would have been fascinated by the constitutional and legal conse- quences of the creation of a European Community, inspired by the making of the United States. -
Ethnicity, Race and Inequality in the UK
“This is simply a must-read book for all those who want to understand the UK in and Inequality Race Ethnicity, racial inequalities in British society. It provides an up-to-date and convincing case that we have a long way to go in terms of achieving racial justice.” John Solomos, University of Warwick Available Open Access under CC-BY-NC licence. Fifty years after the establishment of the Runnymede Trust and the Race Relations Act of 1968, which sought to end discrimination in public life, this accessible book provides commentary by some of the UK’s foremost scholars of race and ethnicity on data relating to a wide range of sectors of society, including employment, health, education, criminal justice, housing and representation in the arts and media. It explores what progress has been made, identifies those areas where inequalities remain stubbornly resistant to change and asks how our thinking around race and ethnicity has changed in an era of Islamophobia, Brexit and an increasingly diverse population. Bridget Byrne is Professor of Sociology at The University of Manchester and Director of Khan, Nazroo and Shankley Byrne, Alexander, the ESRC research Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE). Claire Alexander is Professor of Sociology at The University of Manchester and Deputy Director of the ESRC research Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE). BRIDGET Omar Khan is Director of the Runnymede Trust, the UK’s leading independent race equality think tank. BYRNE ––– James Nazroo is Professor of Sociology at The University of Manchester, Deputy Director of the ESRC research Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE) and co-director CLAIRE of the Manchester Institute for Collaborative Research on Ageing. -
Protection of Immigrant and Racial Minorities: a Survey of British Legal History
William & Mary Law Review Volume 13 (1971-1972) Issue 2 Article 5 December 1971 Protection of Immigrant and Racial Minorities: A Survey of British Legal History Richard Plender Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Repository Citation Richard Plender, Protection of Immigrant and Racial Minorities: A Survey of British Legal History, 13 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 338 (1971), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol13/iss2/5 Copyright c 1971 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr PROTECTION OF IMMIGRANT AND RACIAL MINORITIES: A SURVEY IN BRITISH LEGAL HISTORY RICHARD PLENDER* The American lawyer, aware of the great volume of state and federal. legislation which governs racial discrimnmation in the United States and, aware of the growth of racial friction in Britain during the last two decades, is apt to be surprised by the relative paucity of anti-discrimia- tory legislation in the United Kingdom. The main corpus of British law on racial discrimination is now contained in the Race Relations Act 1968 and the few remaining sections of the Race Relations Act 1965. The scarcity of anti-discrimiatory legislation in Britain is popularly attrib- uted to the novelty of racial discrimination in that country I In the same way, the supposed novelty of Britain's so-called race problem is often thought to explain the great interest in the subject shown by members of the academic community in the last 20 years. -
Race Relations Amendment Bill [HL]
RESEARCH PAPER 00/27 The Race Relations 8 MARCH 2000 Amendment Bill [HL] Bill 60 of 1999-2000 This Bill implements a principal recommendation of the Report of the Macpherson Inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence, that the Race Relations Act 1976 should apply to the police and the Government decision that it should be extended to all those areas of public authority activity not expressly included by the Act, and excluded by the Amin judgment. It is to be debated in the House of Commons on second reading on Thursday March 9 2000. Jane Fiddick HOME AFFAIRS SECTION Joe Hicks SOCIAL AND GENERAL STATISTICS HOUSE OF COMMONS LIBRARY Recent Library Research Papers include: 00/12 The Armed Forces Discipline Bill [Bill 53 of 1999-2000] 04.02.00 00/13 The Northern Ireland Bill [Bill 61 of 1999-2000] 07.02.00 00/14 The Conflict in Chechnya 07.02.00 00/15 The Sexual Offences (Amendment) Bill: ‘Age of Consent’ and abuse 07.02.00 of a position of trust [Bill 55 of 1999-2000] 00/16 Licensing (Young Persons) Bill 1999-2000 [Bill 14 of 1999-2000] 09.02.00 00/17 The Parliamentary Oath 14.02.00 00/18 Postal Services Bill [Bill 54 of 1999-2000] 11.02.00 00/19 Unemployment by Constituency, January 2000 16.02.00 00/20 European Defence: from Pörtschach to Helsinki 21.02.00 00/21 Economic Indicators 01.03.00 00/22 The Health Service Commissioners (Amendment) Bill [Bill 15 of 1999-2000] 01.03.00 00/23 The Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) (No. -
The Place of Equal Opportunities in the Devolution Settlement: a Legal Analysis
Equality and Human Rights Commission research report 33 The place of equal opportunities in the devolution settlement: a legal analysis Colm O’Cinneide Faculty of Laws UCL The place of equal opportunities in the devolution settlement: a legal analysis Colm O'Cinneide Faculty of Laws UCL © Equality and Human Rights Commission 2009 First published Autumn 2009 ISBN 978-1-84206-194-7 EQUALITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION RESEARCH REPORT SERIES The Equality and Human Rights Commission Research Report Series publishes research carried out for the Commission by commissioned researchers. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission. The Commission is publishing the report as a contribution to discussion and debate. Please contact us for further information about other Commission research reports, or visit our website: Equality and Human Rights Commission Optima Building 58 Robertson Street Glasgow G2 8DU Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0141 228 5910 Website: www.equalityhumanrights.com You can download a copy of this report as a PDF from our website: www.equalityhumanrights.com/scotland/research-in-scotland If you require this publication in an alternative format, please contact the Communications Team to discuss your needs at: [email protected] Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. The existing devolution settlement 3 2.1 The powers of the Scottish Parliament 3 2.2 The functions of the Scottish Government 4 2.3 The basic structure of the devolution settlement: a summary 6 3. Grey areas within the devolution settlement 7 4. Making the devolution settlement work 9 4.1 The flexible or ‘open’ nature of the devolution settlement 9 4.2 Non-legal mechanisms – memoranda of understanding and concordats 11 5. -
To What Extent Will Brexit Have an Impact on Employment Law Regarding Equal Pay in the UK?
To what extent will Brexit have an impact on employment law regarding Equal Pay in the UK? Shakar Abdullah Ba Hons Business and Management with Law Cardiff Metropolitan University MAY 2017 Signed Statement Declaration: I declare that this Dissertation has not already been accepted in substance for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. It is the result of my own independent research except where otherwise stated. Name: SHAKAR ABDULLAH SIGNATURE: ii ABSTRACT The aim of this research paper was to analyse the impact that the UK existing the European Union would have on employment rights regarding equal pay. The UK joined the European Union in 1973. By joining, the UK became one of the member states bound by the European Union Treaties that set out the obligations and privileges of being a member, It’s main aim is to keep the peace between the member states. Regardless of all the benefits and privileges of this membership, the people of the UK chose to leave the European Union(EU). The referendum took place on 23rd June 2016 with 51.9% voters voting in favour of leaving. The supremacy of Parliament played a massive role in answering this research question. It was vital to analyse the UK’s constitution to understand the relationship between the UK and European Union and to come to the conclusion that EU law had the power to override domestic law because Parliament gave the European Union that power. The rights regarding equal pay in the UK pre-dates those of the EU and although the Equality Act 2010 is a British statute passed by Parliament, it has been heavily influenced and embedded by EU law. -
National Cases and Good Practices on Equal Pay
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination National cases and good practices on equal pay Justice and Consumers EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers Directorate D — Equality and Union citizenship Unit D.1 Non-discrimination and Roma coordination Unit D.2 Gender Equality European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUROPEAN COMMISSION National cases and good practices on equal pay Author Susanne Burri Coordination Susanne Burri Alexandra Timmer 2019 Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers 2019 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission; however, it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2019 ISBN 978-92-79-95770-3 doi:10.2838/93401 Catalogue number DS-06-18-130-EN-N © European Union, 2019 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 7 2 NATIONAL CASES 9 2.1 National courts 9 2.1.1 Landmark cases 9 2.1.2 Some follow-up cases after preliminary questions to the CJEU 9 2.1.3 Preliminary questions from national courts 12 2.1.4 The concept of pay 12 2.1.5 Direct and indirect