Question regarding ethical/religious beliefs and DWP sanctions?

TELLIT01

sparkermarketing wrote: »

what happens then? do they just refuse to accept your custom if you want to buy alcohol?

They send you to another till.

TELLIT01

Moving away from the OPs question somewhat, but should supermarkets be free to 'control' what is sold at certain tills? One of our local supermarkets employs a severely disabled young lady, and she works on the tills. There is a sign on her till stating cards only because she struggles to handle the cash. Is that wrong?

TBagpuss

whitegoods_engineer wrote: »

I would not shop in a supermarket where they excuse staff from doing a perfectly normal and expected task of handling acohol. Nobody is telling them they have to drink the stuff, they are simply processing a normal item in a western country where alcohol is legal. To make special exceptions to accommodate religious beliefs is ridiculous.

I think you will find yourself unabl to shop in any major supermarket.

Respect for a religious beliefs is a human right.
Employers are expected to make reasonable accommodations to respect people's human rights.
In a tiny corner shop where there is only one staff mmember on duty at a tim, it is unlikelyto be reasonable for an employee to be excused from handling certain products or kinds of transaction.

In a large supermarket, it's likely to be a reasonable adjustment.

So, in answer to the OP, if you had a specifc religious or ethical issue, then in the first instnace you could reaise this with the potential employer to see whether they could accommodate it. If they were unable or unwilling to do so and you refused the job, then this can be a 'good reason' not to santion you.

Guidance for DWp says:

"The following are examples of religious or conscientious objections which may
provide good reason
1. an objection to employment that involves the handling or supply of alcohol, cigarettes, tobacco or certain food products (e.g. pork)
2. a religious objection to being in employment on a particular day each week
3. an objection to employment with something which may be used to destroy life, whether human or animal"


One of the specifc examples they gives covers the exact situation you describe:

"Aabish is a practising Muslim. Alcohol is forbidden in Islam and some Muslims also
refuse to handle it.
Aabish has good reason for not applying for an advertised vacancy in a local offlicense. The job will involve handling and selling alcohol and cannot reasonably be avoided with such a small number of employees.

However, one of the major supermarket chains is also recruiting for till operators.
They have a written policy to respect the wishes of any employee not to handle specific products for religious or cultural reasons and where any employees who have religious beliefs about certain products or what foods or drink they could handle, would place them on a till where those products are not usually served,
such as clothing, or on tasks away from a till.
Aabish would not be able to show a good reason for failing to apply for a job at the supermarket based on her religious beliefs regarding alcohol."

KatrinaWaves

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Moving away from the OPs question somewhat, but should supermarkets be free to 'control' what is sold at certain tills? One of our local supermarkets employs a severely disabled young lady, and she works on the tills. There is a sign on her till stating cards only because she struggles to handle the cash. Is that wrong?

I would of course refuse to go to that chain of supermarkets because of the inconvenience of this shop allowing this lady to do her job within the constraints of her disability.

Comms69

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Moving away from the OPs question somewhat, but should supermarkets be free to 'control' what is sold at certain tills? One of our local supermarkets employs a severely disabled young lady, and she works on the tills. There is a sign on her till stating cards only because she struggles to handle the cash. Is that wrong?

Business decision.


A local pub has gone cashless - their choice.

Comms69

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

I would of course refuse to go to that chain of supermarkets because of the inconvenience of this shop allowing this lady to do her job within the constraints of her disability.

Good for you, she cannot perform the basic function of the job


emphasis on 'cannot' rather than 'won't'

littleboo

Comms69 wrote: »

Business decision.

Probably not a business decision, more likely a reasonable adjustment to comply with the law.

Comms69

littleboo wrote: »

Probably not a business decision, more likely a reasonable adjustment to comply with the law.

Neither religion nor the state should be involved in commercial enterprise, but unfortunately that's the way it is.


to clarify, business decision. Could just get rid.


(yes legally, yes it's morally reprehensible)

motorguy

Comms69 wrote: »

In a different shop...


Pandering to the demands of people based upon their belief in some figure (whether real or not) has no place in a civilised society.

Any time I've seen it is because the sever is under 18.

If you want to flounce out and make a statement that noone in the store will know or care about, that's your prerogative.

motorguy

KatrinaWaves wrote: »

I would of course refuse to go to that chain of supermarkets because of the inconvenience of this shop allowing this lady to do her job within the constraints of her disability.

Eh? Yeah that would make the girl feel great. People refusing to shop there because she's on the tills.

Plenty of other tills no doubt if you have only cash with you. No need for a big statement.

Fair play to her for getting out there and getting on with it.