judge rejected the argument that graduates are forced to work without pay in Poundland was "slave labor" and violated the human rights
Governmentreturn to work plan criticized as "forced labor" have been declared legal by the Supreme Court.
A judge dismissed the demand for graduates Cait Reilly unemployment, which requires a system to work for free in a discount store Poundland violated human rights laws prohibiting slavery.
Mr Justice Foskettsitting in the High Court in London, said that "the characterization of this system that participation or be similar to the" slavery "or" forced labor "seems to be a far from contemporary thought. "
Reilly, 23, of Birmingham, and 40 year old unemployed truck driver Jamieson Wilson, of Nottingham, have both stated plans pending that have been violated Article 4 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which prohibits forced labor and slavery.
The judge said both Reilly and Wilson are each entitled to a declaration that there had been violations of law by providing job search, 2011, in their case.
had made mistakes in reporting on Reilly requirements of the work program of the Academy not to consider the system was not mandatory. Wilson had been given insufficient notice of the Community Action Program.
However, the judge ruled he violated the provision of Article 4, and errors do not invalidate the regulations of research grants employment in 2011.
The decision comes as a relief for the government. If I had lost a legal challenge, all systems back-to-work could have been valid.
The judge criticized the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) about the lack of clarity of the letters that warn candidates for a possible loss of benefits if they fail to participate in schemes without good reason, and called for greater clarity.
The DWP said it had revised its letters, but nevertheless intend to use this part of the judgment.
- "The issues raised in their cases were properly raised in spite of the main arguments have been rejected."
- reject allegations of forced majeure, the judge said the two schemes under challenge "are a long way removed from the class of colonial exploitation of the work that led to the formulation of Section 4.
A DWP spokesman said: "We are pleased but not surprised, that the judge according to our plans are not forced labor
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(407)
-
▼
August
(15)
- Contraception, healthcare and the costs women will...
- I wish my mother had aborted me | Lynn Beisner
- Why the Chinese community is a dead cert for bookies
- Pop music and crosswords: tools for council public...
- Unpaid work schemes ruled lawful as high court rej...
- Euro 2012: Steven Gerrard is relishing his England...
- Britain must end its sordid treatment of the Chago...
- New Jersey Muslims sue to protect their rights fro...
- Eurozone crisis live: Spain passes bond auction te...
- University guide 2013: University of Sunderland
- Making public service staff into brand ambassadors
- Is your job finished when the A levels are over?
- Applying to university - fees and living costs fun...
- Round up: boosting morale on a budget
- Teacher Network newsletter: Microsoft, Amnesty and...
-
▼
August
(15)
0 comments:
Post a Comment