header-logo header-logo

18 October 2007 / Simon Cheetham KC , Harriet Bowtell , Stephen Levinson
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Bully boys

The law on harassment at work should be made more coherent say Stephen Levinson, Harriet Bowtell and Simon Cheetham

The law relating to harassment at work—bullying by another name—is in a shambles. The present situation is that any employee protected by discrimination legislation is legally protected from harassment and has a remedy in the employment tribunal. The question arises why only these employees should deserve protection. 

 In its recent consultation paper, A Framework for Fairness: Proposals for a Single Equality Bill for Great Britain, the government gave voice to a pious hope that the law relating to harassment should be as coherent as possible. However, it gave no real commitment to resolve matters.

The consultation paper attempted to draw a distinction in relation to employees between the discrimination legislation and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA 1997) on the basis that the latter is designed to combat stalkers. This is now an entirely unreal distinction, as the House of Lords made abundantly clear in Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital [2006] UKHL 34, [2006] 4 All ER 395,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll