Search results

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

An Act to make further provision for securing the health, safety and welfare of persons at work, for protecting others against risks to health or safety in connection with the activities of persons at work, for controlling the keeping and use and preventing the unlawful acquisition, possession and use of dangerous substances, and for controlling certain emissions into the atmosphere; to make further provision with respect to the employment medical advisory service; to amend the law relating to building regulations, and the Building (Scotland) Act 1959; and for connected purposes. [31st July 1974]

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

One of the common law duties owed by the employer is his duty to take reasonable care for the safety of his employee. This common law duty is an implied term in the contract of employment and is therefore contractual in nature. Because of the difficulties which may arise in bringing an action in contract for breach of the employer's duty of care, the employee who has sustained injuries during the course of his employment (although he may sue either in contract of tort will normally bring a tort action.

Under the terms of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) was formed on 1st October 1974. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) was established on 1st January 1975 as the operating arm of the Commission. The Executive includes six Inspectorates and the Employment Medical Advisory Service (EMAS). The Inspectorates are Agriculture Inspectorate, Alkali and Clean Air Inspectorate, Explosives Inspectorate, Factories Inspectorate, Mines and Quarries Inspectorate and Nuclear Installations Inspectorate. EMAS acts as the medical arm of the Executive and is the channel of medical advice to the Commission and the Inspectorates within the Executive, HSE has a large Information and Advisory Services Branch (DIAS) which includes among other things the Library and Translation Services. The library organization, although integrated on a broad basis, operates in two independent functional areas—services in support of the research laboratories and those to staff in Head Office and field organizations. The Executive carries out a considerable volume of research in its Health and Safety Laboratories (HSL). This paper describes the development of the library services in support of research in HSL. The laboratories, with a total staff of approximately 500, are located at Sheffield, Buxton and Cricklewood (London). Each laboratory has a library, the main one being located in Sheffield.

Governments of all major industrialized communities are steadily extending the areas in which they seek to regulate the day‐to‐day activities of ordinary people. This raises important problems in ensuring that people know what is being required of them. I shall in this paper be describing these problems as we see them in the new Health and Safety Executive (HSE). But after spending thirty years in various jobs in the public service I am sure that the problems facing us are similar to those which arise in many other fields.

Aims to examine the impact of health and safety legislation emanating from the European Community and to analyse what effect, if any, it will have on British occupational health and safety law. An examination of the social action programmes shows that the pace of change has increased rapidly since the Single European Act was incorporated into the Treaty of Rome and became operative from July 1987. Because of rapid changes that are occurring on a broad front there was a need to be selective. Emphasizes to some extent, therefore, the construction industry because it would appear that European legislation is likely to have a major impact on British law and practice in this industry.

A research team at the Middlesex Polytechnic recently carried out a small‐scale study on behalf of the Health and Safety Executive to investigate the implementation by companies of certain new provisions of the Health and Safety at Work Act, 1974. These provisions are contained in Section 2 of the Act and require employers, inter alia, to inform and train their employees in safety matters and to consult on these matters with work‐place safety representatives appointed in pursuance of the Act.