Keith Houchen Posted December 2, 2018 Share Posted December 2, 2018 It's animal cruelty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted December 2, 2018 Author Share Posted December 2, 2018 (edited) Never looked into it, because I don’t have a cat and don’t intend to get one. Pretty sure dogs can be Vegan but cats shouldn’t. Also, everything I’ve seen from the BBC lately has been dire Edited December 2, 2018 by UK Kat Von D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 21 hours ago, UK Kat Von D said: Also, everything I’ve seen from the BBC lately has been dire Speaking of which, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46385597 A tribunal is to be asked to decide whether veganism is a "philosophical belief" akin to a religion, in a landmark legal action. Jordi Casamitjana says he was sacked by the League Against Cruel Sports after disclosing it invested pension funds in firms involved in animal testing. He claims he was discriminated against, and the tribunal will now decide if veganism should be protected in law. The League Against Cruel Sports says he was dismissed for gross misconduct. It denies the sacking was because of his veganism. Mr Casamitjana says he is an "ethical" vegan. "Some people only eat a vegan diet but they don't care about the environment or the animals, they only care about their health," he told the BBC. "I care about the animals and the environment and my health and everything. "That's why I use this term 'ethical veganism' because for me veganism is a belief and affects every single aspect of my life."  Dietary vegans and ethical vegans both eat a plant-based diet. However, ethical vegans try to exclude all forms of animal exploitation, for instance avoiding wearing or buying clothing made from wool or leather, or toiletries from companies that carry out animal testing. They may refer to "companion animals" rather than "pets", and will avoid zoos or other environments where they consider animals are exploited. Mr Casamitjana worked for the animal welfare charity the League Against Cruel Sports and claims that, to his surprise, he discovered it was investing its pension funds in companies that carried out animal testing. He says he drew this to the attention of his managers. When nothing changed, he informed other employees and was sacked as a result. He is now bringing a legal case, claiming he was discriminated against on the basis of his vegan belief. 'Factually wrong' In a statement, the League Against Cruel Sports said: "Mr Casamitjana was dismissed from his position because of gross misconduct. "To link his dismissal with issues pertaining to veganism is factually wrong. "Mr Casamitjana is seeking to use his veganism as the reason for his dismissal. We emphatically reject this claim."  However, in a hearing next March, an employment tribunal will, for the first time, determine whether veganism is a "philosophical belief" protected by law. If the tribunal decides that it is, the discrimination claim will proceed to a full trial. "Religion or belief" is one of nine "protected characteristics" covered by the Equality Act 2010. The others, all ranked equally, are: age disability gender reassignment marriage and civil partnership pregnancy and maternity race sex sexual orientation It is unlawful for an employer to discriminate directly, by treating an employee less favourably than others because of their religion or belief. Harassment and victimisation on grounds of religion or belief are also unlawful, as is indirect discrimination, by applying a criterion or practice that disadvantages employees of a particular religion or belief unless there is an objective justification. To qualify as a philosophical belief, veganism must: be genuinely held be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available If Mr Casamitjana succeeds in his hearing, the consequences for vegans could be life-changing. His solicitor, Peter Daly, of Bindmans LLP, said: "If we are successful, we will achieve a judgment which formally recognises the protected status of ethical veganism and which could then be used as the basis to combat discrimination against vegans in employment, in the provision of goods and services, and in education. "This is therefore a landmark case." But Nick Spencer, from the think tank Theos, which stimulates debate about religion in society, warns of dangers in unrestricted recognition and legal protection of people's beliefs. "The irony in all this is that rights are intended to be liberating but if we're all turned into rights bearers, my rights clashing with your rights, we end up having to appeal to the courts to sort out our differences and that can become oppressive for everybody," he said.  Figures from the Vegan Society, which supports Mr Casamitjana, suggest veganism is on the rise. The society says there are currently 600,000 vegans in Britain, up from about 150,000 in 2014. It bases its estimate on surveys from the Food Standards Agency, Ipsos Mori and the National Centre for Social Science Research. "For many people, veganism is a deeply held belief," says Louise Davies, Vegan Society head of campaigns, policy and research. "This could be a landmark ruling that will not only recognise the validity and importance of veganism but also confirm that the needs of vegans in their employment and their everyday lives must be taken seriously." Mr Casamitjana says he has been discriminated against many times because of his vegan beliefs. He said: "It is important for all the vegans to know that if they want to talk about veganism, they are protected and no-one will say 'Shut up'. "It is important that the law protects vegans." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members BomberPat Posted December 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted December 3, 2018 11 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said: He said: "It is important for all the vegans to know that if they want to talk about veganism, they are protected and no-one will say 'Shut up'. That is the absolute worst argument for the recognition he's after, and only serves to play into those who see hate speech laws as an encroachment on their freedom of speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted December 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted December 3, 2018 The actual case is difficult, because people should have a right to know whether or not a body that they might donate to is breaching their own ethics. Additionally, on the face of it, it looks like he went through conventional channels first and they ignored him, at which point, what remedy can he pursue to get them to disclose this information? Personally, I think he'd have a better chance of filing for wrongful dismissal under whistle-blower protection laws. Attempting to make dietary principle a protected characteristic is a much bigger battle, but then again, maybe he's up for that fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 Granted, it's been years since my Union involvement, but whistleblowing doesn't count here as that is when you report things to your industry authority, not work colleagues.  This is a gross misconduct case and from what I see in that story, his employer wasn't even doing anything against its own ethics.  The League Of Cruel Sports are exactly that, they don't campaign against testing on animals so investing pension funds in companies that do, although we don't know to what extent, doesn't even provide a conflict of interests. Sounds like they sacked him not because he was a vegan, but because he was an arsehole.  Again, we are all guessing but seems like they asked him to stop disrupting the workplace with his pension fund campaign, he didn't, so after all avenues were explored, the only one left was to get rid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted December 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted December 3, 2018 Fair enough. Thanks for that, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted December 3, 2018 Author Share Posted December 3, 2018 2 hours ago, Carbomb said: Attempting to make dietary principle a protected characteristic is a much bigger battle, but then again, maybe he's up for that fight. It isn’t a dietary principle, it is a belief system that a lot of people are very serious about and receive a lot of shit for. If a man sitting in a cloud is protected, then me not wanting animals to be slaughtered should be protected too. A lot of my friends have received awful treatment in the workplace for being Vegan, a lot of it outright bullying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 My advice to anyone who believes they are being bullied in the workplace is to start a diary noting times, dates and instances.  Compile evidence and present it.  If nothing gets done about it, see your union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 37 minutes ago, UK Kat Von D said: It isn’t a dietary principle, it is a belief system that a lot of people are very serious about and receive a lot of shit for. If a man sitting in a cloud is protected, then me not wanting animals to be slaughtered should be protected too. But where do you draw the line? What’s to stop someone saying that they believe that slaughtering animals is their belief system and that that can’t be protected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members gmoney Posted December 3, 2018 Paid Members Share Posted December 3, 2018 45 minutes ago, UK Kat Von D said: It isn’t a dietary principle, it is a belief system that a lot of people are very serious about and receive a lot of shit for. If a man sitting in a cloud is protected, then me not wanting animals to be slaughtered should be protected too. A lot of my friends have received awful treatment in the workplace for being Vegan, a lot of it outright bullying. They can always get a new job, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, WyattSheepMask said: But where do you draw the line? What’s to stop someone saying that they believe that slaughtering animals is their belief system and that that can’t be protected? It isn't a matter of having a belief, it's a matter of respecting a belief.  If someone constantly berates someone in the workplace because of their belief, the workplace need to step in.  It is something that works both ways, so someone constantly berating and mocking a vegan for being a vegan is a potential disciplinary as much as a vegan constantly berating someone for their daily chicken sandwich is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted December 3, 2018 Author Share Posted December 3, 2018 15 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said: It is something that works both ways, so someone constantly berating and mocking a vegan for being a vegan is a potential disciplinary as much as a vegan constantly berating someone for their daily chicken sandwich is. In all fairness, my friends going into work talking about apple picking over the weekend is a bit different to their boss strolling in and laughing about going fox hunting the day before. I get your point though. 17 minutes ago, gmoney said: They can always get a new job, right? Yeah they could, although there is a difference between working in an outdated industry and co-workers beings cunts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted December 3, 2018 Share Posted December 3, 2018 7 minutes ago, UK Kat Von D said: In all fairness, my friends going into work talking about apple picking over the weekend is a bit different to their boss strolling in and laughing about going fox hunting the day before. I get your point though. Only because of the legality surrounding fox hunting. If they were hunted legally, there isn’t really a difference, in procedural terms. Although getting the name of the hunt he is a member of could be used against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Kat Von D Posted December 3, 2018 Author Share Posted December 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said: Only because of the legality surrounding fox hunting. If they were hunted legally, there isn’t really a difference, in procedural terms. Although getting the name of the hunt he is a member of could be used against them. Ah I was talking about morality rather than legality with that point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts