A revision to the Equality Act 2010 contained in a Private Members’ Bill being backed by the Government will make employers liable for harassment of their employees by third parties. The Sun has more.
PUB bosses fear they could have to hire “banter bouncers” to police boozy chats under proposed laws.
Rules to protect workers from being harassed may give them the right to sue if jokes or comments they hear offend them.
An update to the Equalities Act aims to stop people getting abused at work.
But critics say it will leave punters unable to shout at the telly or crack a joke without putting landlords at risk of being sued by upset staff.
They want explicit exemptions for jokes and sporting chat written into the new Worker Protection Bill.
Hugh Osmond, head of Punch Taverns, said: “How could we stop a group of people coming into a pub and having an offensive chat in the corner?
“You may even need extra people to try and police it. You wouldn’t find rules this strict in China or Russia.”
Tory MP Danny Kruger asked: “Will pubs be expected to put up signs saying, ‘No banter allowed’?”
The Government says the law will not stop free speech but “will ensure employers are legally liable if they fail to protect their employees”.
When Rishi Sunak was standing in the Conservative leadership election, he said he would review the Equality Act. Is this what he had in mind?
Stop Press: Watch me talking about the risk this Private Members’ Bill poses to free speech on GB News.
Stop Press: The Sun has a follow-up piece about this, urging Kemi Badenoch to “call time” on this proposal. Includes a short comment at the end by me.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Our employee is so we’ll respected by the management that we wrapped him up in cotton wool and put him in a cupboard for safety, he suffocated!
Inside every Liberal Progressive Social Engineer there is a totalitarian bursting to get out.
The US term liberal means Someone who’s not beholden to Christian values, especially those relating to sex. That’s a pretty narrow definition of the term and these people are usually anything but liberal wrt pretty much anything beyond that.
Traditional Liberal was the Laissz Faire, live and let live idea. But the progressives have hijacked that word and are in the process of seeking control over every aspect of our lives. —–“Progressive” sounds like a good idea doesn’t it? Who could possibly object to progress? —-But progressing to what? And that usually means more control by government over people , hence my comment above
Original article:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/21284396/pub-bosses-hire-banter-bouncers-protect-staff-new-laws/
NB: Not really worth reading as it doesn’t contain any details, either, just interested parties opinions and interpretations.
What about hecklers? Would they no longer be allowed to heckle or would the comedian no longer be able to put them down?