My Workplace May Fire Me! Read Why! - Advise Needed.

[JSinghnz]

Veer ji ,

one cannot prove Racism from above conversation just that an expectation of a certain standard of behaviour was stated, even one would expect it from anyone . Yes Bhai Sahib is working a helpline/customer support and people get irate often when they perceive that they aren't going to get what they want, but , in truth no one has a right to be abusive and most companies have this policy that they will terminate business conversation or refuse to treat the offer of custom from abusive individuals.

Just because I buy a product it is my job to inform myself of the conditions of sale(caveat emptor) as ignorance of the law is no defence in the UK, in contract law if I have a shop I can refuse to treat any custom I like because the contract is only struck on sale of goods . The guys battery was sold fit for purpose and could in theory be exchanged for similar(sales of goods act 1979) but not get money back, also the contract he struck was for defective part replacement up to six months from sale, which is reasonable for manufacturing faults to become apparent especially in high turnover electronic goods. If he doesn't like it he should complain to the company in writing simple.

Racial discrimination lawsuits are rare here because they are hard to make stick without serious evidence , thankfully unlike USA we have not got to the level of petty litigation running through our courts due to the strict standards held for allowing cases to be submitted . Bhai Sahib's best bet is to talk with HR at head office, and put his case since they will be recording all inputs to this case employer, complainant and employee plus any legal department entries I doubt seriously there is an active union in his particular shop as I think that his company runs a franchise model but maybe his good record and relationship will mean he can talk with his direct manager and iron out the misunderstanding sooner. Yes he should say he expressed an opinion which was naive and mistaken in the business context and apologise in writing but beyond that he should not blow it up further.

Mandla vs lee 1982 is the case law for Sikhs being recognised as a racial group due to seperate indentity and culture.

Under Equality Act 2010 one can justify discrimination see below

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/england/discrimination_e/discrimination_unlawful_conduct_e/ge14_justifying_discrimination.htm

thing is Bhai Sahib did not fall under any of the four classes of discrimination , he did not deny service because of the race of the person just because of contract law and company policy. He explained the situation clearly and in an non-hostile manner and gave fair warning of termination of conversation when abuse started from the Complainant.

JagsawSingh will now be dazed by your reply as earlier he was amazed at the advice being offered by others.

[jkvlondon]

JagsawSingh will now be dazed by your reply as earlier he was amazed at the advice being offered by others.

aw shucks :blush2:

[JagsawSingh]

Racial discrimination lawsuits are rare here because they are hard to make stick without serious evidence , thankfully unlike USA we have not got to the level of petty litigation running through our courts due to the strict standards held for allowing cases to be submitted

Thats the complete opposite of the facts. When it comes to discrimination tribunals etc it is far easier and cheaper to do so in the UK. In contrast, vry few race complaints are heard in America as usually only class action and those taken up by their civil liberties groups get heard.

Just because I buy a product it is my job to inform myself of the conditions of sale(caveat emptor) as ignorance of the law is no defence in the UK, in contract law if I have a shop I can refuse to treat any custom I like because the contract is only struck on sale of goods . The guys battery was sold fit for purpose and could in theory be exchanged for similar(sales of goods act 1979) but not get money back, also the contract he struck was for defective part replacement up to six months from sale, which is reasonable for manufacturing faults to become apparent especially in high turnover electronic goods. If he doesn't like it he should complain to the company in writing simple

You're missing the point. This isn't a Contract Law issue. Nobody, even the customer himself, is talking about his consumer rights. That issue ended the moment he was informed about the company policy. The issue is one where his race and religion were brought into the business conversation.

Lets put it this way, lets assume you telephone the Gas company to query your bill. Whether or not you're a Christian, Jew or Sikh should have notheing to do with your query...but what if they bring it into the equation ?

They would have no right to do so and you, just like this customer, would not be happy with it.

As far as this company are concerned, they need to protect themselves from this because, although it was our friend to who did this, it is the company itself that is liable through vicarious liability.

As I said before, clearly what our friend did was wrong....clearly being fired is perhaps too strong a punishment, but in order to avoid that he needs to acknowledge he made a mistake and show his employers he has learned from that mistake.

[jkvlondon]

Thats the complete opposite of the facts. When it comes to discrimination tribunals etc it is far easier and cheaper to do so in the UK. In contrast, vry few race complaints are heard in America as usually only class action and those taken up by their civil liberties groups get heard.

You're missing the point. This isn't a Contract Law issue. Nobody, even the customer himself, is talking about his consumer rights. That issue ended the moment he was informed about the company policy. The issue is one where his race and religion were brought into the business conversation.

Lets put it this way, lets assume you telephone the Gas company to query your bill. Whether or not you're a Christian, Jew or Sikh should have notheing to do with your query...but what if they bring it into the equation ?

They would have no right to do so and you, just like this customer, would not be happy with it.

As far as this company are concerned, they need to protect themselves from this because, although it was our friend to who did this, it is the company itself that is liable through vicarious liability.

As I said before, clearly what our friend did was wrong....clearly being fired is perhaps too strong a punishment, but in order to avoid that he needs to acknowledge he made a mistake and show his employers he has learned from that mistake.

The only way you can prove racial discrimination is if you have been negatively impacted by the actions of the defendant , in this case the only thing that has been denied the complainant is the ear of the defendant , or his perceived wrong of denying service (not so ) so therefore complaint has no legal basis.

You are being sworn at and being harangued just for doing your job , and you warn the abuser that if he doesn't stop the call with be ended (within rights nothing in law to force someone to stand and take it) upon which it gets worse so you calmly say I didn't expect that granted the religion shouldn't have come into it (which is a rookie mistake in CS) but it was not derogatory against the race or the individual apart from criticising his swearing . If you took this to a lawyer he would say no chance of getting a case through on this basis.

Race discrimination acts and equality laws do not give the complainant any backup because this is not the type of case that they cover. The reality is he heard someone tell him i don't like what I'm hearing from you and now I am ending the call . he was heard, his questions were answered , the company policy was explained, his contract was not valid for what he wanted so nothing more could be done . No case for negative treatment or result because of that sentence .

Yes he phoned to complain he was not served in a way he liked , not that he wasn't given a battery so his case is not relevant to law . Tribunals are seperate arena from small claims courts or magistrates and they usually come in for employment law issues not civil cases . This is not really an employment law issue ...unless the company do try to penalise Bhai Sahib then they would fall foul of the equality act 2010, so in all I think they wont go down that path easily ...

[JagsawSingh]

You are being sworn at and being harangued just for doing your job , and you warn the abuser that if he doesn't stop the call with be ended (within rights nothing in law to force someone to stand and take it) upon which it gets worse so you calmly say I didn't expect that granted the religion shouldn't have come into it (which is a rookie mistake in CS) but it was not derogatory against the race or the individual apart from criticising his swearing

According to our freind, the cutsomer merely said the word s##t before our friend brought his religion into it. Then, and only then, did they customer use actual swear words. I'm sure we'd all take offence if a company made threats to terminate our call if we used the mild word s##t.

I'm not sure why, but you seem fixated with the Contract Law / Cosumer rights element of this scenario. You keep going on about it even though its a non-issue here.

You're not looking at this thing objectively. Look at it from the company's point of view. As they are ultimately liable for anything their employee says or does you can appreciate their need to protect themselves from this happening again.

It should not have happened. Our friend was clearly in the wrong. He's now making his situation worse by not acknowledging and apologising for his mistake.

If you took this to a lawyer he would say no chance of getting a case through on this basis.

On the contrary. Assuming the company involved was a large coporation such as carphone warehouse, phones 4 u etc, I'd be eager to take it on on behalf of the customer. Hoping, of course, that the employees lawyer is you, given that you're giving him shoddy and misguided advice. :cool2:

[jkvlondon]

According to our freind, the cutsomer merely said the word s##t before our friend brought his religion into it. Then, and only then, did they customer use actual swear words. I'm sure we'd all take offence if a company made threats to terminate our call if we used the mild word s##t.

I'm not sure why, but you seem fixated with the Contract Law / Cosumer rights element of this scenario. You keep going on about it even though its a non-issue here.

You're not looking at this thing objectively. Look at it from the company's point of view. As they are ultimately liable for anything their employee says or does you can appreciate their need to protect themselves from this happening again.

It should not have happened. Our friend was clearly in the wrong. He's now making his situation worse by not acknowledging and apologising for his mistake.

On the contrary. Assuming the company involved was a large coporation such as carphone warehouse, phones 4 u etc, I'd be eager to take it on on behalf of the customer. Hoping, of course, that the employees lawyer is you, given that you're giving him shoddy and misguided advice. :cool2:

veer ji ,

nice specs ...point I was making is that customer has no real case against the individual or company as the negatives are coming from himself , thus clarifying by going through any possible backup for 'adverse treatment' , sure if I say 'I don't expect such language from a Singh' I can be held accountable personally for my opinion/statement , it is a matter between the two individuals, can you really prove the company is responsible for a personal statement?

Really faeces is not swearing hmmm interesting? Anyway I doubt the company will bother to do anything about the customer because legal aid doesn't extend to this kind of vapid case ... Oh Waheguru what a mess this duniya is ... bhale lok nu kut pehndi rehndi ae te badmash nu phoolmala milde

[JagsawSingh]

Sis, it will not go to any court but....if I were the customer (and again, this is assuming we're talking about one of the big companies here suh as carephone warehouse) I would get a letter sent from a lawyer to the company. He wanted a new battery but it is 100% certain he will get far more than a new battery from them in order to avoid the adverse publicity.

But going back to our friend....he is making his situation worse by not acknowledging the fact that he was wrong and has learned from it.....and it is your bad advice for him to do that.

[jkvlondon]

Sis, it will not go to any court but....if I were the customer (and again, this is assuming we're talking about one of the big companies here suh as carephone warehouse) I would get a letter sent from a lawyer to the company. He wanted a new battery but it is 100% certain he will get far more than a new battery from them in order to avoid the adverse publicity.

But going back to our friend....he is making his situation worse by not acknowledging the fact that he was wrong and has learned from it.....and it is your bad advice for him to do that.

a few posts back I suggested him going to HR and later

Yes he should say he expressed an opinion which was naive and mistaken in the business context and apologise in writing but beyond that he should not blow it up further.

i.e. yes please damage control but don't give the company fuel ... :biggrin2: again a very fine line that can be exploited by sharp practices by corporations so yes get a professional to draw it up

[gurdssingh]

Ummh, I think I stated in the first page of this post, he can't accuse you of being racist as Singh is not a race. Please refer back to my post. Yes Jagsaw Singh is correct in UK only Sikh and Jews are a race /religion, but my lawyer friends will know just Singh surname does not imply you are a Sikh. Possibly it can be assumed someone with Singh as surname is Sikh, but not all Singh are Sikh, but all Sikh are Singh. Hindus used Singh many centuries prior to GuruSahibhan.

Guys trying to look cleaver by answering questions with advanced google searches spending umpteen hours, it's quite clear some posters have no clue what they are on about, I can pm for example, no need to spoil the forum.

[HeatSikhingMissile]

VJKKVJKF

das works a mobile phone contact centre where we take calls for technical support.

A Singh called in asking for the order of his recent battery. I informed him that due to a pervious mistake you can't get a battery replacement for this device as it is over 6monthes ( which is correct for the company policy )

Now the singh started to swear saying words such as SH!T , i advised that i would terminate the call if he kept swearing as i don't appreciate this kind of language especially from a Singh.

This so called "singh" swore at me telling me to "f*** you then" my reply was ok then , good luck getting a new battery. The singh disconnected the call then.

This so called "singh" has called in after i went and logged a complaint with the CEO saying i was being racist towards him. After listening into the call the operation mangers are logging this as a racial slur for saying singh and also as not good customer service. The company ceos want action taken against me including a investigation. The implications are i could lose my job for just stating : i don't appreciate this kind of language especially from a Singh.

If i do get fired on these grounds and the company twists it as some kind of racial abuse , what can i do? Can i appeal this anyhow?

This isn't justice.

Any advice people? I'm based in the UK.

Think of it this way, if you had a white coworker on the phone with another person being aggressive and having a 'white' name, and your coworker said "I don't like your language, especially coming from another white person", and you others overheard it, could it be seen as being racially exclusionary? The employer has every right to treat this matter equally for everyone, you were wrong to start preaching to the customer just because his birth religion so happens to be the same as the one you're practicing.