Quinn not for repealing law that allows discrimination by schools?

eblistic

I find this a bit surprising and disappointing. Are there no international laws that it violates?...

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0429/1224295674704.html

Ambersky

I think that in order for it to be tested someone would have to take the issue to the European Court.
With the vast majority of schools and many hospitals etc being run under religious patrongage, mainly catholic but other religions and denominations as well, it leaves a teacher, nurse, sna, in a very difficult situation.
With Lesbian Gay Bi Trans (LGBT) people it often makes them live in fear of coming out at work or of someone finding out. This leads to a double life, people not really getting to know you, an inability to reveal maybe some of the talents and other work you do that could contribute to your workplace.

Mr Quinn said he believed the best approach to deal with the legislation was to seek to change attitudes.

What is being proposed is already in process, there has been a vast amount of work done by various individuals and groups in changing social attitudes.
The fact that there are people still holding onto this legistaltion shows, me anyway, that there are still a lot of powerful people who will continue to fight against equality.

Also when issues are left to be dealt with by the good will and generousity of individual employers it makes it very personal.
When a rule is not set out clearly people tend to hold back further than they actually have to, just in case.
So when people hold up the fact that no LGBT teacher has taken this to Europe so far, as proof that there is no problem, it simply isnt true.
There have been cases of people not being taken back, not being promoted, being bullied and let go, because of the belief that they were LGBT.
Usually employers dont come right out and say they are not employing someone because they are LGBT, because they dont want to go through the massive publicity and controversy that would ensue.
You have to get someone very strong or very angry and willing not only to go through what they have had to endure so far but to go on and become a national and international figure.

Maybe the right situation will arise for a test case but for now this is what stands as the issue that was fought on schools having the right to uphold their ethos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Flynn
Scary isnt it and its not just about LGBT employees just think of all the ways you could be seen to not be obeying the catholic ethos for instance.

opinion guy

Ok I'm probably vastly oversimplifying things here - but hasn't Quinn committed to removing most of the schools from religious management and taking them under secular state control ? Won't this simply sidestep this issue ?

Ambersky

It will for the schools that are no longer under religious management, I think and hope.
We would like the equality legislation to protect workers who find themselves working in the institutions that remain under religious management.
We still have no idea how many that will be, or what percentage, or how long the change proposed would take.

eblistic

Ambersky wrote: »

It will for the schools that are no longer under religious management, I think and hope.
We would like the equality legislation to protect workers who find themselves working in the institutions that remain under religious management.
We still have no idea how many that will be, or what percentage, or how long the change proposed would take.

The principle, that religious employers shouldn't be exempt from equality legislation, should hold regardless of the numbers involved. It seems to me they are just trying to avoid ruffling the bishops' feathers while the talks about the future of primary education are ongoing.

Paparazzo

Very disappointed with this. Expecting a child soon and really didnt want to get it christened. Looks like I may have to now

opinion guy

Paparazzo wrote: »

Very disappointed with this. Expecting a child soon and really didnt want to get it christened. Looks like I may have to now

Eh....what ?

This is about discrimination in the emplyoment of teachers on religious grounds. Why would it affect your decision to baptise or not ? Have you already sold your future child into a career as a teacher ?!?!?

seamus

A proper test case for this would be for a strictly non-religious employer to refuse employment to a member of a religious organisation. Then we'll see whether or not this law stands up.

magicbastarder

seamus wrote: »

A proper test case for this would be for a strictly non-religious employer to refuse employment to a member of a religious organisation.

the employer would have to be acting on behalf of an organisation whose core ethos is one of an atheist or anti-religious bent. how many such organisations are there?

Paparazzo

opinion guy wrote: »

Eh....what ?

This is about discrimination in the emplyoment of teachers on religious grounds. Why would it affect your decision to baptise or not ? Have you already sold your future child into a career as a teacher ?!?!?

Sorry, didn't read the full story. I assumed it was the other religious discrimination used by schools. I.e. preference towards catholic pupils. My excuse is that it was almost 1am and I needed to go to bed

MrPudding

Ambersky wrote: »

I think that in order for it to be tested someone would have to take the issue to the European Court.

I am not sure what the status of the European Convention on Human Rights is in Ireland... If it has been transposed into Irish law then anyone should be able to rely on those rights in domestic courts without having to go to Europe.

Another option would be for a foreigner attempting to challenge this law under the European provisions for the free movement of workers... It might be possible for them to argue, particularly if they were from a less catholic country than Ireland, that this rule was more likely to discriminate against foreigners and was therefore a threat to the free movement of workers. it is a bit of a stretch and the European Court does give quite a bit of leeway to allow member states to protect cultural identity, as a Dutch woman found out when challenging the requirement to have a qualification in Irish to become a teacher.

EDIT: It looks like the European Convention has been fully transcribed, someone please correct me if I am wrong.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2003/en/act/pub/0020/index.html

Article 141 wrote:

Prohibition of discrimination


The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

And it also requires that the Irish courts interpret domestic law in a manner which is compatible with the aims of the convention, if it is not possible to do this then they must declare the law incompatible. The law will still stand, but it will likely be changed. So it would seem that there is no need to "go to Europe" as such. A person should be able to exercise their rights under the European Convention, in the Irish courts, and argue that this particular legislation is in breach of art 141 of THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 2003. I think.

MrP