in al C determined THE 3,000-strong gay pride march on Saturday erupted into a forceful protest against police harassment.
After the cops arbitrarily arrested seven people on the march, half the demonstrators marched to Bow Street police station instead of dispersing. They secured the speedy release of those arrested. indulge in tendencies.?
Saunders why it was sacking him.
and tribunal upheld this finding.
The latter attracted to young basis.
ment was dangerous.
would be afraid for their children. Discrimination against, and prejudice against us, may be bigotted and prejudiced.
earlier that their judgements have prejudice against gays. 'INFORMATION was received that you homosexuality. At a camp accommodating large numbers of school children and teenagers it is totally suitable to employ a person with such That was how, late last year, the Scottish National Camps Association explained to John The association had not received any comПЯЛСЯООТНИСТОКО OL US COLUUL. had simply heard that John was homosexual and he did not deny it. An industrial tribunal appeal accepted evidence from psychiatrist that John was not at all sexually attracted to young people, and that heterosexuals are as likely as homosexuals to be sexually people. Nevertheless the ists alid may hee thad they ontary sin ee a' 'reasonable' employer, even though it may have no scientific The unstated assumption behind this arguThe tribunals were impressed by management's claim that it thought parents In other words the tribunal has decided that since gay women and men are discriminated there strong 'reasonable employers may dismiss us fairly because such employers For gay people this is a devastating decision.
gay people, tribunals have been at pains to show , that homosexuality is not the reason for finding a sacking to be fair, although it has been obvious been based on The John Saunders case is the first time that an employment appeal tribunal has said that homosexuality is, by itself, a sufficient reason to sack somebody. The decision is binding on industrial tribunals and is a precedent which endangers all gays who work with young people.
The Saunders case is part of the general offensive against employment rights. The decisions of the tribunals, in particular, have in. creasingly tended to favour management. John Saunders' case is a significant development in If the decision stands, employers will be able to sack gays simply on the basis of their John Saunders was not a member of a trade union. The only gay cases that have been won before tribunals, and there are pitifully few, have been those where the person involved ha had the strong support of co-workers and their NUPE, NALGO, and the GMWU have forcefully condemned the Saunders decision.
NUPE's genera secretary, said that the union would suppor any member sacked in similar circumstances and that the case points to the need to extend employment protection legislation to prevent discrimination on the grounds of sexual orien• comerence NUPE over. whelmingly voted to include protection from anti-gay discrimination in its own guidelines for NALGO has made repeated demands to the TUC to include sexual orienta.
model opportumitics Yet in many unions it is still argued that a worker's sexuality is a private matter and there fore has nothing to do with the union. The John Saunders case makes it clear that a ga person's sexuality is an industrial issue.
This case has stirred interest in gay rights i the Labour Party, for the first time in nore Several constituency parties have passed motions condemning the decision Many left Labour MPs are now interester