Muslim salesman 'hurt' by wine prizes

Anthony Butcher · 24-11-2005, 12:50 AM

Quote:

A Muslim insurance salesman suffered religious discrimination because his employers offered only alcohol as a performance incentive, an employment tribunal heard.

Imran Khan, 25, claimed that the bottles of wine on offer put him at a disadvantage because, as a Muslim, he could not drink alcohol and was therefore unable to claim the prizes.

British-born Mr Khan, who works for Direct Line Insurance, is seeking damages for "hurt feelings" under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003.

The tribunal in Bristol heard that Mr Khan was one of a team of 14 in the city who were offered rewards for sales of pet and household insurance policies.

Mr Khan's team leader, Louise Cummings, said she introduced the incentives as a means of "improving staff morale and performance". "If I had realised that I had hurt anyone's feelings, then I would have taken steps to rectify that immediately," she added.

Tariq Sadiq, for the company, said that another Muslim worker, who had won an alcoholic prize in a similar scheme, had "simply" exchanged it for an alternative.

Judgment was reserved.

As a tee-totaller, I can understand that he might not want alcohol as a reward, but this is just ridiculous. It sounds like he is just an opportunist deliberately using his religion as an excuse to sue a company having made no attempt to ask for an alternative. If the article is accurate, I hope that they chuck it out and award costs to the company.

mkpdavies · 24-11-2005, 12:59 AM

I hope they sack his sorry ass too.

Hasn't the muppet heard of EBAY?

I have won prizes I haven't wanted too and I just gave them away.

I bet they find in favour for him!

Captain Apathy · 24-11-2005, 07:47 AM

thats not descrimination, its just a prize he doesnt feel comfortable with, and any way isnt the winning more important than the prize !!!

as it is by the looks of his stupidity and negoriating skills the chances of him winning any way are probably non existant..

people need to chill on this planet !

C_steam · 24-11-2005, 08:40 AM

Quote:

British-born Mr Khan, who works for Direct Line Insurance, is seeking damages for "hurt feelings" under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003

IMHO, the individual should have raised it with his line manager and pointed out the problem. Any decent line manager would have put in a substitute prize or cash equivalent - net result, no problem.

Should never go to tribunal.

John Carter · 24-11-2005, 12:19 PM

So, that was an interesting bit of the act:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20031660.htm

Quote:

In these Regulations, "religion or belief" means any religion, religious belief, or similar philosophical belief.

So, you could get a job and then sue the employer if they didn't provide separate kitchen/canteen facilities for vegetarians.

Cyburn · 24-11-2005, 01:55 PM

I hate it when people sue for the dumbest reasons .

Captain Apathy · 24-11-2005, 02:50 PM

ive got a philosophical beleife that working is not good...

so can i now get a job then sue them for making me work against my beliefs !!!!

(this si just an example)

TomPhil · 24-11-2005, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Carter

So, that was an interesting bit of the act:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20031660.htm

Quote:

In these Regulations, "religion or belief" means any religion, religious belief, or similar philosophical belief.

So, you could get a job and then sue the employer if they didn't provide separate kitchen/canteen facilities for vegetarians.

Does that mean that being an athiest counts as a religious belief? :?

IceDragon · 25-11-2005, 12:02 AM

In the main it is not the individuals who abuse the system but the system which allows this to happen. The real ogre is not the Muslim but the people who have allowed the law to be used so disgracefully. We are on the verge of handing over our cities to drunk louts and the courts are jam packed with cases yet the legal authorities can find time (and I dare say legal aid) to pursue the case of someone who really doesn't have a case.

mkpdavies · 25-11-2005, 12:41 AM

I beleive we should bring in a law, where a judge can and will, in really stupid cases like this find the plantent guilty of contempt of court and fine them a significant portion of their wages, wealth or hammer them with community service if they are broke.

If there was a blatant common sense solution to the case that they did not bother to follow up or just no case to answer too, a jury should be asked if the person should be punished.

In this case I would imagine 12 good people to find this moron guilty and make him subsidise his case and a few others to boot.

Perhaps even apply it to the lawyers who took the case too. That should stop a lot of the **** coming in.

24-11-2005, 12:59 AM	#2 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	I hope they sack his sorry ass too. Hasn't the muppet heard of EBAY? I have won prizes I haven't wanted too and I just gave them away. I bet they find in favour for him! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

24-11-2005, 07:47 AM	#3 (permalink)
Captain Apathy Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: North Somerset Posts: 520	thats not descrimination, its just a prize he doesnt feel comfortable with, and any way isnt the winning more important than the prize !!! as it is by the looks of his stupidity and negoriating skills the chances of him winning any way are probably non existant.. people need to chill on this planet ! __________________ www.insanefaith.com

24-11-2005, 02:50 PM	#7 (permalink)
Captain Apathy Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: North Somerset Posts: 520	ive got a philosophical beleife that working is not good... so can i now get a job then sue them for making me work against my beliefs !!!! (this si just an example) __________________ www.insanefaith.com

25-11-2005, 12:41 AM	#10 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	I beleive we should bring in a law, where a judge can and will, in really stupid cases like this find the plantent guilty of contempt of court and fine them a significant portion of their wages, wealth or hammer them with community service if they are broke. If there was a blatant common sense solution to the case that they did not bother to follow up or just no case to answer too, a jury should be asked if the person should be punished. In this case I would imagine 12 good people to find this moron guilty and make him subsidise his case and a few others to boot. Perhaps even apply it to the lawyers who took the case too. That should stop a lot of the **** coming in. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

24-11-2005, 01:55 PM	#6 (permalink)
Cyburn Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Kilburn, London Posts: 523	I hate it when people sue for the dumbest reasons .

25-11-2005, 12:02 AM	#9 (permalink)
IceDragon Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 1,048	In the main it is not the individuals who abuse the system but the system which allows this to happen. The real ogre is not the Muslim but the people who have allowed the law to be used so disgracefully. We are on the verge of handing over our cities to drunk louts and the courts are jam packed with cases yet the legal authorities can find time (and I dare say legal aid) to pursue the case of someone who really doesn't have a case.