Post by account_disabled on Dec 28, 2023 3:57:32 GMT
Atime I comment. CJEU The employers right to impose a dress code. ware Labor law European Union law European jurisprudence minutes Adelina Voicu April Cause C Samira Achbita Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v. GS Secure Solutions NV The actual situation GS is a private enterprise that mainly provides reception and reception services to clients belonging to both the public and private sectors. In Ms Achbita a Muslim started working as a receptionist at GS being employed under an employment contract for an indefinite period. At the time there was an unwritten rule within.
GS that workers could not wear visible Country Email List signs expressing their political philosophical or religious beliefs at work . In Mrs. Achbita informed her superiors that she intended to wear the Islamic veil during working hours from then on which is why the management of the company informed Mrs. Achbita that wearing a veil is not tolerated because wearing visible political philosophical or religious signs is contrary to the neutrality assumed by the enterprise. As such following a sick leave Ms. Achbita notified her employer that she was going to resume work and wear the Islamic veil. Later the works council of.
GS approved an amendment to the internal regulations according to which workers are prohibited from wearing visible signs at work expressing their political philosophical or religious beliefs or from performing any rite arising from them . persistent willingness to wear as a Muslim the Islamic veil at work she was fired . Legal provision subject to interpretation Art. para. lit. a of Directive direct discrimination occurs when a person is treated in a less favorable way than another person is has been or will be treated in a similar situation based on one of the reasons mentioned in article Art. The objective of this directive is to establish.
GS that workers could not wear visible Country Email List signs expressing their political philosophical or religious beliefs at work . In Mrs. Achbita informed her superiors that she intended to wear the Islamic veil during working hours from then on which is why the management of the company informed Mrs. Achbita that wearing a veil is not tolerated because wearing visible political philosophical or religious signs is contrary to the neutrality assumed by the enterprise. As such following a sick leave Ms. Achbita notified her employer that she was going to resume work and wear the Islamic veil. Later the works council of.
GS approved an amendment to the internal regulations according to which workers are prohibited from wearing visible signs at work expressing their political philosophical or religious beliefs or from performing any rite arising from them . persistent willingness to wear as a Muslim the Islamic veil at work she was fired . Legal provision subject to interpretation Art. para. lit. a of Directive direct discrimination occurs when a person is treated in a less favorable way than another person is has been or will be treated in a similar situation based on one of the reasons mentioned in article Art. The objective of this directive is to establish.