In his interesting article about terminal illness (Death in the dark, 16 January), Leo Benedictus was wrong about one very important point. He says that “it is unlawful for an employer to sack you because of your health” but, unfortunately, this is not the case. It is perfectly lawful and happens quite frequently. Provided the employer has considered the possibility of making “reasonable adjustments” to the content and organisation of the work – and these will be judged against the ability of the employer to “reasonably” do so, not the medical condition of the employee – and has followed a “fair” procedure, dismissal is entirely possible.
In effect, it would be on the basis that the employee is unable to carry out her/his side of their employment contract, not because they are ill as such. Trade unions are all too aware of this “get-out” clause and know how difficult it is to defend a seriously ill or disabled member against a determined employer. Recent government changes making access to employment tribunals more difficult have certainly exacerbated the problem and there is no doubt it will become even more common in the future.
Mike Scott
Nottingham
• Following the verdict on the case of David Miranda – in which the government had argued that an act of journalism could be an act of terrorism – you say in your editorial (20 July), “The government … is now under an obligation to respond with changes to the law.” However, when our courts formally declare that a piece of English law can be interpreted in no other way than as being in conflict with the European convention on human rights, parliament is under no obligation either to change the offending legislation – which remains in force – or even to consider changing it.
Keith Fisher
Oxford
• It is understandable that Labour’s access to justice commission is mainly comprised of lawyers (Labour access to justice commission to meet formally for first time”, theguardian.com, 19 January, 2016). However, the problem is not only the affordability of their services without legal aid, but also, in many cases, the readiness of justice.
The commission should look at extending the scope and remit of magistrates: a system in England, established almost 700 years ago by Edward I, to appoint voluntary lay people (justices of the peace), advised by a qualified lawyer, to administer prompt justice at reasonable cost.
Geoff Naylor
Winchester, Hampshire
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
