Fair discrimination- Discrimination means treating some people differently from others. It isn't always unlawful - after all, people are paid different wages depending on their status and skills. However, there are certain reasons for which your employer can't discriminate against you by law. Discrimination happens when an employer treats one employee less favourably than others. It could mean a female employee being paid less than a male colleague for doing the same job, or an employee from a minority ethnic community being refused the training opportunities offered to other colleagues.
There are specific laws against some types of discrimination (called 'unlawful discrimination'). If your employer treats you less favourably for an unlawful reason, you may be able to take action. If your employer treats you unfairly for any other reason, this is not unlawful discrimination.
There are laws against discrimination on the basis of your:
-gender
-marriage or civil partnership
-gender reassignment
-pregnancy and maternity leave
-sexual orientation
-disability
-race
-colour
-ethnic background
-nationality
-religion or political opinion
-age
Unfair discrimination- Unfair discrimination is when you are treated differently as compared to other categories of people and that your dignity as a human being is impaired by such treatment.
Discrimination is regarded as unfair when it imposes burdens or withholds benefits or opportunities from any person on one of the prohibited grounds listed in the Act, namely: race, gender, sex, pregnancy, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth etc.
It is important to note that the Act does not prohibit discrimination but unfair discrimination.There are certain circumstances where discrimination can be regarded as fair e.g. measures designed to advance persons disadvantaged by the previous system of racial discrimination.
Cases for fair discrimination (read case)- The new amendments to the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (the EEA) assist employers in defending unfair discrimination claims by enabling employers to show that the alleged unfair discrimination is justifiable. Prior to the amendment, an employer was only able to escape liability by showing that the discrimination in question was fair.
The scenarios that are applicable to the driving situations one may find themselves in are:
<h3>
What do you do when the car is forced into the guardrail?</h3>
Best response: I will keep my hands on the wheel and come to a halt gradually. The reason for keeping my hands on the wheel is to ensure that I don't lose control. This will enable me to gradually steer away from the guard rail. The next step is to gradually ease back onto the speed lane. It is improper to slam on the brakes at this point because it would cause a collision with the vehicle behind.
Scenario 2: When driving on a wet road and the car begins to slide
Best response:
It is not advisable to increase speed. It is not advisable to pump the brakes. It is not advisable to even depress the brake pedal and hold it down gently. The best thing to do is to ease one foot off the accelerator. At this time, there should be no sharp turns.
Scenario 3: When you are in a slow traffic and you hear the siren of an ambulance behind
Best response: The best thing to do at this point is to move to the right of the lane and stop.
This helps to prevent the patient in the ambulance from dying. It also ensures that the ambulance has clear way to pass. It is NOT advised to move to the left. That will cause more problems. It is better to stay on the lane if there is no way to park on the right shoulder of the road.
Learn more about driving scenarios at;
brainly.com/question/1071840
#SPJ1
The correct answer is: Stage 5, where the bill goes to the floor And then that is where the floor debate occurs. I would appreciate if you mark Brainliest if helpful, thanks!
Answer: Encouraging the courts to make the right choice
Explanation:
Media coverage is beneficial in the sense that it can keep the American public informed on rulings that would fundamentally set the groundwork for future rulings. For example take the case of the State of Minnesota v. Derek Chauvin. This was a rare example of a police officer being punished for grave misdeeds.
Media coverage may put pressure on a court to make a right decision. However in some cases this can become problematic, swaying the jury one way or another and making them partial when they are to remain impartial.
