header-logo header-logo

11 October 2007
Issue: 7292 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-detail

Nose-stud employee reinstated

News

A Hindu woman, sacked from Heathrow Airport for wearing a nose-stud, has been reinstated.

Amrit Lalji had worked as a cleaner and customer relations worker in a VIP lounge for over a year when she was fired for wearing a nose-stud that her employer, Eurest, a catering company, said could be hazardous.
Lalji claimed the jewellery was religious, comparable to a wedding band, but when she refused to remove it she was suspended and later sacked.
Brian Palmer, employment partner at Charles Russell LLP, says Lalji’s reinstatement, which was done before the case went to an employment tribunal in a claim under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/1660), was a sensible decision.

He says: “The key point in Lalji’s case is that, although employed by a caterer, her job did not have any involvement with catering. Had the matter gone to tribunal then Eurest would have had to seek to justify the requirement for the removal of jewellery set against the job which Lalji carried out. That would have been difficult to achieve.”

Palmer adds: “While employers may consider that a blanket policy applied equally to all employees may offer them the best protection against potential discrimination claims, thought has to be given to policies and the rationale behind them for their enforcement to be successful and non-discriminatory.”

Issue: 7292 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll