Igloo Won't Pay For Your Meat Expenses

[Guest makapaka]

33 minutes ago, jonnyhonda said:

I think you will find it absolutely is discrimination towards carnivores .

Humans are omnivorous.

[Baron99]

"However, the UK's TUC trade union body said at the time that employees "should not be left out of pocket if they choose to eat meat".

 

Mark McWilliams, senior associate in law firm Kingsley Napley's employment team, says Igloo Regeneration's meat free policy "may raise a few eyebrows" but that "a dynamic workforce is more likely to be inspired by it than to complain about it".

He added: "I would certainly be concerned about discrimination if an employer was not providing food for their vegetarian staff."

 

So from reading the above, I'm guessing that nobody has actually decided to put a legal challenge in - yet?  Clearly the TUC look like they're up for taking up a challenge on a union member's behalf?

 

Looking at the report the company is clearly staffed by younger employees, who were happy to go along with the consensus; there were only a "Few dissenters."  It would only take one to put a legal challenge in & it'd be interesting to see what the judgement would be? 

 

I'd say the younger the employee, the less chance they'd want to rock the boat but in the long run, the company would attract workers who had similar values?

 

I'd like to be in on their interview sessions though.  You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will claim it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? 

Edited February 22, 2020 by Baron99

[Guest makapaka]

1 minute ago, Baron99 said:

"However, the UK's TUC trade union body said at the time that employees "should not be left out of pocket if they choose to eat meat".

 

Mark McWilliams, senior associate in law firm Kingsley Napley's employment team, says Igloo Regeneration's meat free policy "may raise a few eyebrows" but that "a dynamic workforce is more likely to be inspired by it than to complain about it".

He added: "I would certainly be concerned about discrimination if an employer was not providing food for their vegetarian staff."

 

So from reading the above, I'm guessing that nobody has actually decided to put a legal challenge in - yet?  

 

Looking at the report the company is clearly staffed by younger employees, who were happy to go along with the consensus; there were only a "Few dissenters."  It would only take one to put a legal challenge in & it'd be interesting to see what the judgement would be? 

 

I'd say the younger the employee, the less chance they'd want to rock the boat but in the long run, the company would attract workers who had similar values?

 

I'd like to be in on their interview sessions though.  You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will claim it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? 

They’re not recruiting on the basis that someone is or isn’t a meat eater - what are you on about?

[Baron99]

33 minutes ago, makapaka said:

They’re not recruiting on the basis that someone is or isn’t a meat eater - what are you on about?

Read my post; 

 

"I'd like to be in on their interview sessions though.  You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will CLAIM it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? '

 

I didn't state they were discriminating against meat eaters but the company has put themselves out their now, clearly indicating, however subtly, that they do not support the meat industry or anyone purchasing products from it. 

 

Edited February 22, 2020 by Baron99

[rachelmum]

 I thought our culture was a democracy rather than a dictatorship. Why are people who enjoy a healthy balanced diet having an employer impose their company ethos on their personal choice. I thought we were being encouraged to diversify and embrace all races/ sexual orientation/disability,  be more inclusive in the workplace. Then it's ok to dicriminate over people who eat meat. I don't think this is going to stand up in the real world and is purely and simply a publicity stunt. 

[Baron99]

32 minutes ago, rachelmum said:

 I thought our culture was a democracy rather than a dictatorship. Why are people who enjoy a healthy balanced diet having an employer impose their company ethos on their personal choice. I thought we were being encouraged to diversify and embrace all races/ sexual orientation/disability,  be more inclusive in the workplace. Then it's ok to dicriminate over people who eat meat. I don't think this is going to stand up in the real world and is purely and simply a publicity stunt. 

Further to my earlier post, as stated, nobody has actually challenged the company legally on this matter. 

 

The 2010 Equality Act covers many areas of discrimination, both direct & indirect.  I don't think it would take a lawyer long to find a part that proves the company is discriminating against refusing to pay the expenses of employees who want to eat meat products? 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Baron99

[Guest makapaka]

1 hour ago, Baron99 said:

Read my post; 

 

"I'd like to be in on their interview sessions though.  You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will CLAIM it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? '

 

I didn't state they were discriminating against meat eaters but the company has put themselves out their now, clearly indicating, however subtly, that they do not support the meat industry or anyone purchasing products from it. 

 

 

“You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will claim it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? “

31 minutes ago, rachelmum said:

 I thought our culture was a democracy rather than a dictatorship. Why are people who enjoy a healthy balanced diet having an employer impose their company ethos on their personal choice. I thought we were being encouraged to diversify and embrace all races/ sexual orientation/disability,  be more inclusive in the workplace. Then it's ok to dicriminate over people who eat meat. I don't think this is going to stand up in the real world and is purely and simply a publicity stunt. 

No one is being discriminated against.

 

we don’t have democratic votes on business expenses policies.

[Baron99]

7 minutes ago, makapaka said:

“You can imagine at some point that an interviewee, having been turned down for a job will claim it was because they'd made it clear that they were a meat eater? “

No one is being discriminated against.

 

we don’t have democratic votes on business expenses policies.

As I've stated, nobody has made any legal challenge against this - yet?  

 

If employees are happy to go along with it, fair enough but for me, I'd say it is discriminatory.  The company is quite happy to reimburse employee A but not employee B. 

[Guest makapaka]

7 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

As I've stated, nobody has made any legal challenge against this - yet?  

 

If employees are happy to go along with it, fair enough but for me, I'd say it is discriminatory.  The company is quite happy to reimburse employee A but not employee B. 

Are vegetarian restaurants discriminating against people?

[Obelix]

2 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Further to my earlier post, as stated, nobody has actually challenged the company legally on this matter. 

 

The 2010 Equality Act covers many areas of discrimination, both direct & indirect.  I don't think it would take a lawyer long to find a part that proves the company is discriminating against refusing to pay the expenses of employees who want to eat meat products? 

Take me for example. Coeliac disease. Allergic to tree and peanuts.

Almost every single vegetarian and vegan food uses nuts or legumes to get the protein up. I simply cannot eat them. Notwithstanding medical advice that I should not ever try to be vegetarian as that is likely to end up with me in kwashorkor...