| 词条 | London Underground Ltd v Edwards (No 2) |
| 释义 |
| name = London Underground Ltd v Edwards (No 2) | court = Employment Appeal Tribunal | image = | caption = | date decided = | full name = | citations = | judges = | prior actions = | subsequent actions = | opinions = | transcripts = | keywords = }} London Underground Ltd v Edwards (No 2) [1997] IRLR 157 is a leading discrimination case relevant for UK labour law, concerning objective justification of indirect discrimination. FactsMs Edwards, a single parent, could not keep up child care after the Underground altered its shift system. She had worked as a train driver for ten years. The Tribunal held that they could have ‘easily, without losing the objectives of their plan and reorganisation, have accommodated the applicant who was a long-serving employee… They did not address themselves to these issues’ JudgmentMorison J dismissed the employer’s appeal. ‘It may be that London Underground would have wished to implement the single parent link but gave in to pressure from their predominantly male workforce.’ First, he said, ‘the more clear it is that the employers unreasonably failed to show flexibility in their employment practices, the more willing the tribunal should be to make a finding of unlawful discrimination.’ Second, employers can change rosters, but ‘should carefully consider the impact which a new roster might have on a section of their workforce.’ Third, nothing said here ‘should be construed as favouring positive discrimination.’ See also{{Clist directdiscrim}}{{Clist justification}}
NotesReferencesExternal links 3 : Employment Appeal Tribunal cases|1997 in case law|1997 in British law |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。