South Lanarkshire Council & Unions Accused of Gender Discrimination "Plot" Against Female Employees [22nd Dec 2011]
A two year pre-hearing which was to decide if a discrimination case can be brought to the courts between low paid female workers and Scotland's largest council came to an end this week. The 2,300 women have claimed that the council have been conspiring with the union to ensure that men are paid more even for doing equivalent jobs. They say that even their local politicians ignored them and that they were victims of a "boy's club" mentality between the unions and labour politicians. The case centres around the South Lanarkshire Council who they say worked with the Unison union to make sure that male workers received extra bonuses which were not awarded to women on the same pay grade. This led to some women receiving £10,000 less than male counterparts. This could have been as much as 50% of their salaries. When the women first approached their union, they were told they didn't have a case and they say that the council have used delaying tactics to try and prevent them carrying on with their case. It is thought that some women will be due 11 years compensation which could be as much as £110,000. The council believe they have adhered to equality legislation. It is thought that thousands of women in the UK may be eligible for compensation due to the French government deciding to pay for women in France to have breast implants removed. The move has come after it was revealed that there may be links to cancer from the implants if they burst. The UK government have said that according to their research the implants are safe and that if they have concerns they should contact their own surgeon. French authorities however, have noted serious irregularities in the implants and that they rupture more often than others. So far, 27 women in the UK have decided to sue their clinics for compensation for the scarring and emotional trauma associated with having the implants removed and new ones fitted. It is thought that thousands more women could be considering the same action. New government guidelines have meant that owners of dogs which harm others could face up to two years in prison. In addition the owners could face a ban from keeping dogs, dangerous dogs being put down and owners being forced to pay compensation to victims. One victim, Maud Franklin, aged 84, was bitten by her neighbour's dog and spent eight days in hospital and had to have a skin graft. She says that victims should receive more compensation. She was awarded just £1,000 and £770 costs from the dog owner, but feels that this was not enough to compensate her for the time spent in hospital and the number of visits her family were forced to make. The courts point out that most dog owners are responsible and that the new guidelines make it possible for them to take action were necessary. A pensioner has been severely injured after she fell through a manhole in a BHS store in Princes Street, Edinburgh. The hole, which led to a storage area, was open in the lighting department. It was later found by the Health and Safety Executive that there were breaches of regulations and that the store left their customers open to risk by not correctly assessing the open manhole. The health and safety of Mollie McGregor who was 77 was also not ensured according to prosecutors. It is thought that Mrs McGregor has chosen not to launch a compensation claim with the BHS at the moment, however criminal action is being taken for negligence on the behalf of the store.  |
Search for Solicitors Near You :
- Solicitors in the UK
- Solicitors in Scotland
- Solicitors in England
- Solicitors in Greater London
- Solicitors in Wales
- Solicitors in Northern Ireland
Get Updates Via Facebook
LATEST NEWS
19 JUN
17 JUN
15 JAN
Popular News Stories:
Are passenger entitled to compensation after Virgins emergency landing? - www.independent.co.uk
78% of people have been "encouraged" to make a compensation claim - www.postonline.co.uk
Custom Search