Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Fixed-term Work Directive 99/70/EC is one of three EU Directives that regulate atypical work. Alongside the Part-time Work Directive and the Agency Work Directive its aim is to ensure that people who have not contracted for permanent jobs are nevertheless guaranteed a minimum level of equal treatment compared to full-time permanent staff.
At first instance, the EOC won. The Court of Appeal upheld this. The Council appealed, arguing it had not shown that selective education was better than non-selective education as a precondition to showing less favourable treatment, and in any case the council had no intention or motivation to discriminate.
The Fixed Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2034) are a UK statutory instrument aimed at protecting employees who have fixed-term contracts of employment. The regulations are in part intended to implement the European Union's Fixed-term Work Directive 1999 (99/70/EC) on fixed term workers. [1]
Alphabet's Google is facing a second complaint from a U.S. labor board claiming that it is the employer of contract workers and must bargain with their union, the agency said on Monday. The ...
Part-time Work Directive 97/81/EC [1] is one of three EU Directives that regulate atypical work. Alongside the Fixed-term Work Directive and the Agency Work Directive , it aims to ensure that people who have not contracted for permanent jobs are nevertheless guaranteed a minimum level of equal treatment compared to full-time permanent staff.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has reached a settlement with Amazon over allegations of hazardous workplace conditions, ABC News first reported Thursday. The settlement ...
The employer’s mistake was not a reasonable and proper cause for singling the complainant out for different and less favourable treatment. 50. ‘The remedy was to award him damages by reference to the amount of the enhanced redundancy terms to which he would have become entitled if he had been offered the revised contract like his fellow ...
The employment tribunal held that the council's treatment was justified under s 5(1)(b) DDA 1995. The request that competitive interviews be removed would have been too favourable, contrary to s 6(7). Both the Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Inner House of the Court of Session dismissed her appeals.