We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Partner with IBS refused SSP

135678

Comments

  • nicechap
    nicechap Posts: 2,852 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    I think our new best friend has read this but stopped at Chapter 3.

    s-l640.jpg
    Originally Posted by shortcrust
    "Contact the Ministry of Fairness....If sufficient evidence of unfairness is discovered you’ll get an apology, a permanent contract with backdated benefits, a ‘Let’s Make it Fair!’ tshirt and mug, and those guilty of unfairness will be sent on a Fairness Awareness course."
  • C_Mababejive
    C_Mababejive Posts: 11,668 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Just digressing slightly,how would employers know they were complying with the equality act? Are they required to keep a register of those who choose to identify as having a disability or have been clinically identified as such? I doubt it..
    Feudal Britain needs land reform. 70% of the land is "owned" by 1 % of the population and at least 50% is unregistered (inherited by landed gentry). Thats why your slave box costs so much..
  • Just digressing slightly,how would employers know they were complying with the equality act? Are they required to keep a register of those who choose to identify as having a disability or have been clinically identified as such? I doubt it..

    Its really more about providing people with equal opportunities, not necessarily equal experiences. And of course they would need to be aware of the disability and the changes that may work.

    Quite often people think its the employers job to make it easier for someone with a disability to do a job. Its not really the case, the employer just needs to make it possible (within reason) for the employee to do the job, so providing ramp access, adapted seats/peripherals, etc.

    Really a lot of the equality act is just being reasonable! Unfortunately quit often the demands made under the guise of the equality act are unreasonable! No employer is required to change the job description, hours, place of work, nature of work to suit anyone else, disability or not.
  • Comms69
    Comms69 Posts: 14,229 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Third Anniversary Name Dropper
    Its really more about providing people with equal opportunities, not necessarily equal experiences. And of course they would need to be aware of the disability and the changes that may work.

    Quite often people think its the employers job to make it easier for someone with a disability to do a job. Its not really the case, the employer just needs to make it possible (within reason) for the employee to do the job, so providing ramp access, adapted seats/peripherals, etc.

    Really a lot of the equality act is just being reasonable! Unfortunately quit often the demands made under the guise of the equality act are unreasonable! No employer is required to change the job description, hours, place of work, nature of work to suit anyone else, disability or not.



    Potentially these could be reasonable adjustments. I wouldn't put it as a blanket statement.


    But I agree with the sentiment
  • As I said in another post, I suggest people research what reasonable adjustments are and what responsibilities the employer has towards employees that have become I'll or disabled, regardless as to it being a known condition prior to employment or a condition that came about whilst in employment.

    I know some think I lied about my experience in advising on employment law for over 10 years. However some of you probably got on with me and trusted my advice in the past on other forums. But I not going to say who I am on those forums, as I don't have to prove anything to anyone here. If you disagree with my advice, prove its wrong, post to case law, legislation etc etc to back up your claim. But then no doubt some will twist the interpretation if said case law and leguslation anyway.
  • As I said in another post, I suggest people research what reasonable adjustments are and what responsibilities the employer has towards employees that have become I'll or disabled, regardless as to it being a known condition prior to employment or a condition that came about whilst in employment.

    I know some think I lied about my experience in advising on employment law for over 10 years. However some of you probably got on with me and trusted my advice in the past on other forums. But I not going to say who I am on those forums, as I don't have to prove anything to anyone here. If you disagree with my advice, prove its wrong, post to case law, legislation etc etc to back up your claim. But then no doubt some will twist the interpretation if said case law and leguslation anyway.

    Why don't YOU point us to case Law that states IBS is a disability at all times. Or in fact the claim that a letter from a gp is enough to meet the definition?
  • _shel wrote: »
    Why don't YOU point us to case Law that states IBS is a disability at all times. Or in fact the claim that a letter from a gp is enough to meet the definition?


    I agree with this. After all, if you take me as an example, I'm certain that nobody would think that I have a disability - I definitely don't think of myself as disabled! I have IBS, as do other members of my family. At times, it can be uncomfortable, painful, inconvenient, limit the tasks that I carry out on a daily basis, and in my mum's case, it also means that she wears incontinence pants when she goes out.

    However, it is not a disability for me (or my mum, or other family members). It's an annoying condition that gets in the way of life sometimes, but it's not a disability in my case. There may be other cases where it is, but I really don't think that anybody can make a sweeping statement that it is a disability. It is how each individual is affected.
  • Raynor v turning point I've mentioned in other threads

    And I don't recall saying IBS in a disability at all times. However it is a long term condition, regardless to severity. And it also can have substantial effect on a suffered to daily activities, daily doesn't necessary mean everyday, just days in which they are effected by it.

    So those who may not consider themselves disabled whist IBS, do to it not effecting them everyday or if its mild that according to law the are disabled. Law isn't optional, personal opinion is.so its a personal choice to not consider oneself disabled, not choice based on law. And its law we should advise people on here, not ones personal choice.
  • Raynor v turning point I've mentioned in other threads

    And I don't recall saying IBS in a disability at all times. However it is a long term condition, regardless to severity. And it also can have substantial effect on a suffered to daily activities, daily doesn't necessary mean everyday, just days in which they are effected by it.

    So those who may not consider themselves disabled whist IBS, do to it not effecting them everyday or if its mild that according to law the are disabled. Law isn't optional, personal opinion is.so its a personal choice to not consider oneself disabled, not choice based on law. And its law we should advise people on here, not ones personal choice.


    :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
  • marliepanda
    marliepanda Posts: 7,186 Forumite
    Raynor v turning point I've mentioned in other threads

    And I don't recall saying IBS in a disability at all times. However it is a long term condition, regardless to severity. And it also can have substantial effect on a suffered to daily activities, daily doesn't necessary mean everyday, just days in which they are effected by it.

    So those who may not consider themselves disabled whist IBS, do to it not effecting them everyday or if its mild that according to law the are disabled. Law isn't optional, personal opinion is.so its a personal choice to not consider oneself disabled, not choice based on law. And its law we should advise people on here, not ones personal choice.

    There is no law stating those with IBS are considered disabled 'in law'.

    If you are truly an employment expert with 10 years experience, please show me the law stating all those with IBS are considered disabled.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 346.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 251.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 451.1K Spending & Discounts
  • 238.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 613.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 174.5K Life & Family
  • 251.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.