<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Riam wins</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelscutt.co.uk/2009/08/14/riam-wins/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelscutt.co.uk/2009/08/14/riam-wins/</link>
	<description>Employment Law Explained</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 12:41:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: GRAHAM FINDLAY</title>
		<link>http://michaelscutt.co.uk/2009/08/14/riam-wins/comment-page-1/#comment-71</link>
		<dc:creator>GRAHAM FINDLAY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelscutt.co.uk/?p=600#comment-71</guid>
		<description>I too am pleased for Riam for her successful compensation claim, but I wonder what it takes to prove &quot;direct&quot; disability discrimination if this case can&#039;t? To me this result epitomises how  flawed the DDA is and how it fails to defend disabled people&#039;s civil rights, with weighting in favour of employer&#039;s and providers interests.

 I also wonder if there was reference to Malcom as part of the ET deliberations. The EHRC have published a response to the problems Malcom caused here:

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/legislative-framework/legal-updates/recent-developments-in-disability-discrimination-cases/the-malcolm-case/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I too am pleased for Riam for her successful compensation claim, but I wonder what it takes to prove &#8220;direct&#8221; disability discrimination if this case can&#8217;t? To me this result epitomises how  flawed the DDA is and how it fails to defend disabled people&#8217;s civil rights, with weighting in favour of employer&#8217;s and providers interests.</p>
<p> I also wonder if there was reference to Malcom as part of the ET deliberations. The EHRC have published a response to the problems Malcom caused here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/legislative-framework/legal-updates/recent-developments-in-disability-discrimination-cases/the-malcolm-case/" rel="nofollow">http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/legislative-framework/legal-updates/recent-developments-in-disability-discrimination-cases/the-malcolm-case/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Posts about disability discrimination (best posts combined for review) as of August 14, 2009 &#124; Discrimination Law News</title>
		<link>http://michaelscutt.co.uk/2009/08/14/riam-wins/comment-page-1/#comment-72</link>
		<dc:creator>Posts about disability discrimination (best posts combined for review) as of August 14, 2009 &#124; Discrimination Law News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelscutt.co.uk/?p=600#comment-72</guid>
		<description>[...] employees are now able to work from home and work from several locations during the working week.   Riam wins &#8211; michaelscutt.co.uk 08/14/2009 I was pleased to learn that Riam Dean, the law student who [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] employees are now able to work from home and work from several locations during the working week.   Riam wins &#8211; michaelscutt.co.uk 08/14/2009 I was pleased to learn that Riam Dean, the law student who [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.382 seconds -->

