Honestly, I don't understand how he did. Baking cakes for everyone at the office except two people you don't like is a childish stunt that is just guaranteed to cause workplace drama. Surely, deliberately causing tensions is valid grounds to be shown the door?
It makes me wonder if the Judge has a son, and is itching for any opportunity to turn discrimination laws around on people.
That's a likely culprit. I know a lot of guys began to demand better treatment of women when they had girls. It should be the same for men, but somehow that slipped by.
I'm not. Protections for employees are rather strong in Europe, even the UK. He would have won based on wrongful dismissal even if there were no discrimination protection.
Baking cakes for everyone at the office except two people you don't like is a childish stunt that is just guaranteed to cause workplace drama. Surely, deliberately causing tensions is valid grounds to be shown the door?
It may warrant a reprimand, but it is not nearly severe enough to justify dismissal. There have been cases with far worse behavior where courts found in favor of the employee.
It makes me wonder if the Judge has a son, and is itching for any opportunity to turn discrimination laws around on people.
Does it always have to be something weird? Can someone not just win based on the fact that it was wrongful dismissal.
I'm amazed he was able to win that.
Honestly, I don't understand how he did. Baking cakes for everyone at the office except two people you don't like is a childish stunt that is just guaranteed to cause workplace drama. Surely, deliberately causing tensions is valid grounds to be shown the door?
It makes me wonder if the Judge has a son, and is itching for any opportunity to turn discrimination laws around on people.
That's a likely culprit. I know a lot of guys began to demand better treatment of women when they had girls. It should be the same for men, but somehow that slipped by.
what makes this especially surprising is that it's the UK. the courts in the UK are notoriously pro-women.
edit: but then again, this isn't really a loss for a female defendant as much as a win for a male defendant
I'm not. Protections for employees are rather strong in Europe, even the UK. He would have won based on wrongful dismissal even if there were no discrimination protection.
It may warrant a reprimand, but it is not nearly severe enough to justify dismissal. There have been cases with far worse behavior where courts found in favor of the employee.
Does it always have to be something weird? Can someone not just win based on the fact that it was wrongful dismissal.
It is a childish stunt but the judge seemed to indicate that they went straight to firing without any like warnings