Is denying time off work to attend a music festival discriminatory?

The actual religious observance is Ash Wednesday. Pancake day is cultural. She should have been given the Wednesday off to go to church and start her 40 day Lenten observance.

I work in a team of 5 including the manager, 3 of us are full time and 2 are 3.5 and 4 days respectively. That means we are a maximum of 4 on a Monday and on Friday afternoon, 5 on Tuesday, Wednesday andThursday, and 3 on Friday afternoon.

Depending on which day of the week and which people, if 2 people are off that can leave us with 2 people or even 1 (Friday afternoon). Add in sick leave, fit round the school holidays etc, and potential leave dates can be very prescriptive. So in our case "no cover" is a very present reason for refusal of leave.

Nice try!

You can understand why the idea of employment rights from day one was opposed by employers when proposed, when you have people like that.

I voted the wrong way

Easter is also a pagan holiday, in fact most of the holidays celebrated by Christians arent actually Christian holidays but are at their foundation pagan.
Christmas - Yule, absolutely nothing to do with the birth of Christ.
Easter - Ester, absolutely nothing to do with resurrection of Christ it is in fact to celebrate fertility.

So arguably Paganism is just as important religion wise as any other religion. So solstice should be classed as a religious holiday.

This, I’d just have gone anyway, if they’d dismissed you for one day unauthorised absence it would have been a daft decision on their part and unless there were extreme extenuating circumstances, likely unfair.

in relation to the point about workplaces not owning us that’s absolutely right but they do have the right to dictate when staff take their annual leave to suit the business needs. That’s not to say you don’t get some managers who act like Temu Hitlers refusing leave just because they can, to cause upset - you absolutely do - but that still doesn’t make the refusal discriminatory, as this claimant found out.

Did it not occur to you to take your employer to a tribunal for this once-in-a-lifetime event, instead of just resigning?

Or are you just not as shameless as the one we are talking about?

A lot of people are getting very animated about a line of argument that didn’t win. It’s not discrimination, and was found not to be discrimination.

But whats an alternative? Sadly, in the majority of work places, there needs to be adequate staff levels/cover so leave will have to be refused if too many people already want certain periods off. Thats just the way it is unfortunately, and some times of the year will be more popular for leave than others

@Livpool are you now a pancakarian?

She should be able to take the time off, but she is also responsible for asking for the time off far enough it advance that other colleagues are unlikely to have it booked. Most employers wouldn't automatically grant a last-minute request from a Roman Catholic to visit the Vatican or a Jew to visit the Temple Mount or a Muslim to make a pilgrimage to Mecca - you'd be expected to plan ahead and ask for the dates you wanted. Even in the case of someone wanting a specific "holy day" off, it's usually reasonable to expect that they know when this day will occur and can give advanced notice that they will be away.

I don't think there should be a ranking when you are allowed to use your allocated leave. And the excuse of 'no cover' is often overused and an easy way out from the manager. How? Employees request specific days off as soon as they know they need the time; if a department of ten people needs a minimum of seven to run smoothly and three people have already requested and been granted the time off already, the fourth person is likely to have their request declined, especially if the understaffing would go on for several days. It's not really in the interests of the manager to claim to be understaffed if they're not - what would be the point? The employee is going to take the days eventually, just not at the same time as several others.

The ruling doesn’t say veganism falls within the definition. It found that ethical veganism amounted to philosophical belief. Dietary veganism, for health reasons or just personal preference, isn’t covered.

I note she was only in the post a year. That must have been a LOOOONG 12 months for her employers.

It is not discriminatory. But I don't think there should be a ranking when you are allowed to use your allocated leave. And the excuse of 'no cover' is often overused and an easy way out from the manager

This.

I remember that.

as I said upthread - they were not!

I think that’s fair if they’re willing to give back say, Easter.

What a horrible judgemental post.

From reading the article it doesn't look like she was asking for additional leave, she just wanted to take the leave that she was entitled to.
Workplaces don't own us, as long as the required notice period is given then we should be free to choose when leave is taken.

I speak as someone who was denied leave to attend my DCs graduation, so I resigned and went anyway.

I might do this - I do love pancakes. Not Christian though so will need to make up my own pancake-themed religion.

This. Always idiots dripping in privilege trying to pretend they are discriminated against.

Hillarious.

And now presumably she’s made her position at work untenable as your relationship with your employer isn’t exactly going to survive having sued them and lost.

I’d imagine dismissal for that would not be against the law. At the very least she’d be at the top of the list the next time redundancy comes up.

No, she's having a laugh and trying to chance her arm.

I read title and silently said to myself ffs - glad they lost

I bet she was allowed to not attend school and wear correct uniform as a child - entitled rule breaker