The case of potential religious discrimination: Cherfi vs G4S Security Services

legal updates

This case demonstrated that employers can put the operational needs of the business first.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

This case discusses employers justifications when looking to refuse an employee’s request for a certain working pattern.

Mr Cherfi, a Muslim security guard, left work every Friday lunch time to attend prayers at his local mosque. This was allowed by his supervisor from 2003 to 2007, until Mr Cherfi was transferred to a new site.

The new site was a new client of G4S’s whom came with a contract that, while on shift, all security staff must remain on site. Therefore Mr Cherfi would not be able to continue to leave the premises every Friday to attend mosque. There was a prayer room on site which G4S were happy for Mr Cherfi to use during his shift. Further G4S proposed a change in his working pattern so that he could have every Friday off to attend mosque, but he would instead work at the weekend.

This was not acceptable to Mr Cherfi who subsequently refused to work at the weekend and further stopped working on the Friday, taking each one off as annual leave.

At Tribunal, Mr Cherfi claimed indirect discrimination, as a practicing Muslim this new contract put him at a disadvantage by not being able to attend mosque. To Counteract this, G4S argued that they had no choice, but to refuse to allow Mr Cherfi to attend mosque whilst on shift due to financial issues, as it would have resulted in them losing the contract.

The Tribunal ruled in G4S’s favour and ruled that they had acted proportionally to achieve a legitimate business aim, i.e. to allow the business contract to remain in operation; they had not discriminated against Mr Cherfi.

This case demonstrated that employers can put the operational needs of the business first, as long as they can prove this, and demonstrate that it is proportionate to the employee’s request. However this is not suggesting that this can be used as a smoke screen to refuse any requests of this nature. Employers must show that they have used this as a legitimate means, i.e. having first exhausted all other avenues available.

Octane FinanceFuel Your Finance

Octane Finance is the broker of choice for new and used car dealers nationwide. With our uncompromising service levels and our genuine and professional approach, you and your customers can trust us to deliver.

Dennis ChapmanIn remembrance of Dennis Chapman 1951 -2015Read More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Extension of Redundancy Protection for Pregnancy and New Parents

Explore the strengthened redundancy protections for new parents with significant amendments to maternity, adoption, and shared parental leave rights, effective from April 2024, ensuring enhanced job security during critical family milestones.

Changes to Flexible Working

Unveil the new landscape of flexible working rights with the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act 2023, now granting ‘day-one’ rights to employees and setting a precedent for more adaptable workplace practices effective from 6 April 2024.

New employment legislation effective from 6 April 2024

Enhanced employee rights, offering day-one entitlements to carer’s leave, flexible working arrangements, and extended redundancy protection for pregnant employees and those on family leave.

Wages increasing from 1 April 2024

With effect from 1 April 2024, the hourly rates of pay are…

Employment Law: Carer’s Leave

The regulations explicitly safeguard employees from any detriment or dismissal resulting from taking or seeking to take carer’s leave.

Employment Law: Annual Leave Changes

Several significant changes came into force on 1 January 2024 that affect the statutory annual leave and pay entitlements.

The office Christmas party season is here

Where an employee makes comments concerning a person’s body parts or style of dress that are intended to be good-natured but are perceived as offensive…

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.