BULLYING OR DISCRIMINATION THE FOCUS OF ATTENTION
As a mediator and sometimes McKenzie Friend I am often invited to help in cases of conflict. The text below may be useful to people experiencing bullying or discrimination
In the UK, when pursuing bullying, bias, or harassment cases, both the impact on the person and the actions of the firm are considered. The focus may vary depending on the specific circumstances of the case. However, it is generally essential to demonstrate the negative impact on the individual, as well as the employer's actions or lack of action in addressing the issue.
Case Studies:
1. Majrowski v. Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Trust (2006): In this case, the plaintiff claimed harassment from his manager, which caused him to suffer from anxiety and stress. The House of Lords held that an employer could be vicariously liable for harassment caused by an employee's conduct under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. This ruling shows that the impact on the individual and the employer's responsibility are both considered.
2. Burton and Rhule v. De Vere Hotels (1996): In this racial harassment case, two waitresses claimed they had been subjected to racially offensive language by a comedian during an event at the hotel where they worked. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that the employer was responsible for the harassment, as it had allowed the offensive conduct to occur during a work-related event. This case highlights the importance of considering the impact on the individual and the employer's responsibility in addressing harassment.
3. Green v. DB Group Services (UK) Ltd (2006): The claimant in this case alleged that she was subjected to sexist comments and bullying by her manager. The court held that the employer was responsible for the harassment, as it had failed to take appropriate action despite being aware of the issue. The focus in this case was both on the impact on the claimant and the actions (or inactions) of the employer.
4. Hussain v. (1) Chief Constable of West Mercia Constabulary (2) Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (2010): In this case, a police officer claimed harassment, discrimination, and victimization based on race and religion. The Employment Tribunal considered the impact of the alleged harassment on the claimant, as well as the actions taken by the employer to address the issue. The tribunal found that some of the claimant's allegations were well-founded, while others were not. The employer was held liable for the proven instances of harassment.
These case studies demonstrate that when pursuing bullying, bias, or harassment cases in the UK, both the impact on the person and the actions of the firm are considered. The focus may vary depending on the specific circumstances, but it is generally crucial to establish the negative consequences for the individual and assess the employer's actions or inactions in addressing the issue.
THE ROLE OF A MCKENZIE FRIEND
A "McKenzie Friend" is a term used in the legal system to describe someone who assists a litigant in person (a person representing themselves in court without a lawyer) during court proceedings. The term comes from a British legal case, McKenzie v. McKenzie (1970), where a litigant wanted a friend to assist him in court but was denied. The subsequent appeal established the concept of a McKenzie Friend.
A McKenzie Friend is not a legal representative or a professional lawyer, and they do not have the right to act on behalf of the litigant or address the court directly. However, they can provide moral support, take notes, help organize documents, and offer advice on legal matters, court rules, and procedures. Their main role is to assist the litigant in presenting their case effectively.
It is essential to note that the decision to allow a McKenzie Friend to assist during court proceedings is at the discretion of the judge, and they can be asked to leave if their behavior is considered inappropriate or disruptive.
In summary, a McKenzie Friend is an individual who provides support and assistance to someone representing themselves in court. They are not legal professionals and cannot act as legal representatives, but they can help the litigant navigate the legal process and better present their case.
Tim HJ Rogers
ICF Coach, Mentor, Mediation Practitioner
MBA Management Consultant + Change Practitioner
Tim@ThinkingFeelingBeing.com
Follow *Thinking Feeling Being*
https://www.linkedin.com/company/thinkingfeelingbeing
https://thinkingfeelingbeing.com/about/
Philosophy, psychology, coaching and practical solutions for everyday life, work, home and purpose.
We support people and organisations achieve their goals through facilitation, workshops, mentoring, mediation and sharing change resources
#people #process #performance #change #processimprovement #changemanagement #workshops #mediation #coach #icfcoach #mentor #facilitation #training #philosophy #psychology #jersey #channelislands
#Coaching #Mentoring #LifeCoach #CareerCoach #LeadershipCoach #ExecutiveCoach #BusinessCoach #SuccessCoach #Mentor #Mentorship #CoachingTips #CoachingSkills #MentoringProgram #LeadershipMentoring #ExecutiveMentoring #BusinessMentoring #LifeMentoring #CoachingProgram #CoachingBusiness #CoachingStrategy #CoachingTools #CoachingStrategies #CoachingQuestions #MentoringAndCoaching #CoachingAndMentoring #CoachingAndTraining #MentorCoach #CoachingToolsAndTechniques
