Topic

human rights

1,662 petitions

Update posted 15 hours ago

Petition to Jane Harris

Ask the National Autistic Society to veto Gatwick as they call autistic people “retards”

If you’re on the autistic spectrum you might believe that because Gatwick Airport are endorsed by the National Autistic Society (www.autism.org.uk) [1], they care about you and how you experience the airport when you arrive [2]. In reality, this couldn’t be further from the truth. “Retard ribbons”. “Unhealthy interest”. “Ridiculous”. “No further support needed”. These are the words from various members of Gatwick management. Executive managers already know the ugly truth, but they’re not bothered. This disgusting, unacceptable attitude needs to change, but I need your help to do that. I am calling for the National Autistic Society, and any other disability charities that have endorsed the airport, to revoke their accreditations. The Airports’ autism awareness training is poor to non-existent and I want the National Autistic Society to insist that Gatwick Airport undergo NAS training to train every single one of their managers on autism awareness, and to continue using them to train new managers as they have shown that they cannot be trusted to do this training themselves. Gatwick earned an after-tax profit of £97.4 million for the tax year of 2016/2017 [3], so they have no excuse to not fund this training. Gatwick can earn their endorsements back only once they have a minimum of 50% of their front-line managers, 50% of their business managers, and 50% of their executive managers pass the training sessions. Gatwick must also commit that they will have 100% of their current managers pass the sessions by January 2020 and maintain 95% training across their entire management structure (this will allow some flexibility to account for time to have new managers trained), or have their accreditation removed again. I am on the autistic spectrum and I used to work at Gatwick Airport as an Airport Security Officer – one of those people you get to see just before you get to the departure lounge. I was, by their own metrics, a top performer. But, throughout my six years of employment, I witnessed bullying and disability discrimination and one such incident made me sick to my stomach. On 12 October 2017, my Lane Performance Manager, a front-line manager (which means that he regularly interacts with people with disabilities) went around to everyone on my team to let us all know that we would be covering the Family and Assistance lane while that crew went on their lunch break. He approached me and with a look of disgust, he said that “now we’ll have to keep an eye out for those f****** retard ribbons”. Fortunately, (I believe) no members of the public heard this. He was referring to the hidden disability lanyards – the sunflower lanyards that a passenger can choose to wear so they can indicate to staff that they have a hidden disability, such as autism, dementia or OCD. I raised a bullying complaint against him which I escalated to the CEO, but the complaint was dismissed without him even being questioned. To add insult to injury they have produced an “autism friendly visual guide” [4] which looks like it was written for a five-year-old travelling through the airport alone. This guide is not targeting families, it is on the disability information page aimed at adults. To have produced this guide they must believe everyone with autism has limited reading and understanding capabilities, demonstrating how little awareness they have about autism. This attitude is not limited to one manager. Meet the manager who takes credit for Gatwick’s hidden disability lanyards: Gatwick’s VIP Facilitation & Police Liaison Manager. When the Department of Transport announced that the Blue Badge scheme was extended to include people with hidden disabilities, he publicly declared on twitter that the decision was “ridiculous”, clearly ignoring the fact that some autistic people could greatly benefit from being included in the scheme. Autistic employees at Gatwick Airport are routinely discriminated against. Another Lane Performance Manager and a Security Business Manager were engaged in a discussion regarding the job performance of an individual on the autistic spectrum and decided that the number of faults and potential health and safety concerns the employee reported on the machinery (which was an expected part of their role) was an “unhealthy interest in the equipment”, rather than the behaviour being indicative of a highly focused interest, which is a common trait for an individual on the autistic spectrum. Training on autistic behaviour could have helped them arrive at a different conclusion, and possibly instigate some sort of support system. The Head of Engineering claims expertise on autism because his son has Asperger syndrome (as if all autistic people have identical symptoms) and the Development Director (a member of executive management) made judgements on the level of support and the reasonable adjustments an autistic employee required without consulting a specialist. The Development Director does understand the importance of specialist advice, as she recognises that autism is a complex condition and requires specialist assessments to determine what adjustments an individual would need. But both senior managers ignored a request for additional support and without any specialist advice used legally required provisions for any employee to justify denying the provision of reasonable adjustments. Enough is enough. Gatwick Airport allows an attitude from their management that people with autistic traits are unhealthy and that people with hidden disabilities are “retards”. They think that their personal judgements can replace specialist assessments and determine what support to provide to autistic individuals. They think that an extra provision given by the government to an individual with a hidden disability is ridiculous. Either they’re ignorant, or they don’t care, but no matter which one it is, something has to change. Gatwick Airport Limited employs approximately 3000 people and saw 45.6 million passengers through the airport in 2017 [5]. The ignorance and attitude from their business managers and executive managers has the potential to impact so many people and even the CEO turns a blind eye to this. This disdain for people with hidden disabilities like autism runs through management at Gatwick, from the front-line management to the Executive Management Team. The National Autistic Society needs to ask the CEO to publicly explain why he has allowed this behaviour and discrimination to run rampant through Gatwick Airport, and why, when he has been made aware of it, nothing has been done. The people who conduct themselves in this way (whatever level of management they may be) need to be brought to account by the CEO, for the sake of the millions of people that travel through or work at Gatwick Airport. I need your help. Gatwick Airport have ignored my voice, but they won’t be able to ignore the National Autistic Society. Will you help me ask for their support? Want to make a bigger impact? Boycott! It’s not easy I know, seeing that Gatwick flies to more destinations than any other UK airport. If a boycott sounds right, but it’s not practical to avoid Gatwick, then maybe avoid spending any money at the lounges. Take your own food with you, sandwiches for example. Bring an empty bottle and fill it up with water when you get through security (helps the planet too). Points:-Front line manager used the phrase “retard ribbons” in regard to the hidden disability lanyards.- Business managers identify typical traits of autism as “unhealthy”.-Executive managers make an assessment that reasonable adjustments are not required without consulting a specialist to determine what kind of adjustments are needed.-Gatwick’s “autism friendly visual guide”, suggests that all people on the autistic spectrum have a low mental capacity yet the guide doesn’t include how any issues travelling through the airport would specifically affect people with autism, such as noise or sensory overload -Gatwick manager engaged in public discussions about how “ridiculous” it would be to consider granting blue badges for hidden disabilities, specifically autism.-Business managers claim to understand what adjustments are needed because they personally know some individuals on the autism spectrum, implying that we all think and behave the same way. Sources:1. https://www.gatwickairport.com/at-the-airport/passenger-services/special-assistance/hidden-disabilities/2. https://www.gatwickairport.com/at-the-airport/passenger-services/special-assistance/special-facilities-and-services/3. https://www.gatwickairport.com/globalassets/documents/business_and_community/investor_relations/year_end_2017/gatwick-airport-limited-financial-statements-31-march-2017.pdf4. https://www.gatwickairport.com/globalassets/documents/passengers/prm/autismguidetogatwick.pdf5. https://www.gatwickairport.com/business-community/about-gatwick/company-information/gatwick-by-numbers/

Jon Pospisil
26 supporters
Update posted 3 days ago

Petition to Sikh Council UK, Sikh Channel UK, Akaal Channel UK, Sangat TV, Guru Nanak Gurudwara Leicester

Ban racist Joginder Singh from Guru Nanak Temple (Leics) for refusing food to Non-Sikhs

xxxxxxx LATEST UPDATE xxxxxxx  PRESS RELEASE: Trustees used charity money to cover-up racism and blackmail newspapers (UK) To view the Press Release webpage, which also features images for media use, please click: http://www.pressat.co.uk/releases/trustees-used-charity-money-to-cover-up-racism-and-blackmail-newspapers-uk-7985b16961645e490f47196a9b465a26/ STARTS Trustees used charity money to cover-up racism and blackmail newspapers (UK) 16th January 2018, Leicester (United Kingdom): Onkar Thandi, who is a member of the Guru Nanak Sikh Temple in Leicester (UK charity number 254837), claims the trustees covered-up racism at the Temple, by using charity money to defame Onkar, exploit prominent personalities, blackmail three newspapers and pay for unjustified legal expenses. Onkar states, “Despite being aware of the trustees’ breaches of legal duties, the Charity Commission [regulator of charities] has refused to remove them, so I’ve applied to the High Court for permission to start charity proceedings, as the trustees must be removed to secure the welfare of charity beneficiaries and charity money”. Racism was practiced and condoned at the Temple Following the Sikh custom of serving ‘Langar’ (free food) to eligible visitors, the Temple runs a ‘free kitchen’ service, which often attracts non-Sikhs, who are vulnerable, needy and homeless. Onkar claims, “Between early 2015 and September 2016, the trustees recklessly ignored verbal complaints, a complaint letter, an online petition and four newspaper adverts, about a Temple employee named Joginder Singh, who frequently mistreated non-Sikhs, and refused to serve Langar to eligible non-Sikhs, which breached Articles 5(m) and 21 of the Sikh Code of Conduct”. The White woman incident Referring to an incident that took place on 1st July 2016, Onkar states, “That evening, Joginder called a homeless White woman a “dirty woman”, and told her that he doesn’t respect her, which made her cry, so I confronted him and filmed the incident on my phone. My video shows Joginder panicking and switching off the lights, before he lies twice and hides in a room. As we [the petitioners] were sick and tired of complaining, we uploaded the video onto YouTube to expose Joginder and the trustees”. The Trustees defamed Onkar in two newspapers In retaliation, the trustees used charity money to publish a dishonest statement in two national newspapers [Des Pardes andPunjab Times], in which they falsely identified Onkar as being a member of an anti-Sikh group, which was using the social media to cause problems at the Temple. Onkar asserts, “To counter the trustees’ serious harm to my reputation, and the unwarranted harassment that I suffered, I was forced to publish petition adverts in four newspapers, which had cost me over £3,000”. The Trustees exploited prominent personalities The trustees further covered-up racism, by using charity money to exploit prominent personalities from Leicester. Onkar explains, “On 1st September 2016, the trustees arranged a meeting at the Temple, which was attended by local councillors, religious leaders and the Chief Superintendent Andy Lee [police], who were all duped into thinking, that my allegations of racism were false, whilst they enjoyed refreshments that were funded by the charity, for this blatant cover-up exercise. In a statement submitted to the Birmingham High Court, [trustee] Amrik Gill claimed, “The unfounded attacks by the Claimant [Onkar’s allegations of racism] were roundly condemned [by the prominent personalities] and a motion passed that an attack [Onkar’s attack] on one religion [the Sikh faith] is an attack [Onkar’s attack] on all religions”. Essentially, Amrik has admitted that the trustees slandered me to the attendees, who accepted that I’d caused problems at the Temple, to attack the Sikh religion [Onkar is a member of an anti-Sikh group], which is untrue. Cunningly, the trustees invited the Mercury [Leicester Mercury newspaper] to photograph the meeting, and to unduly apologise for publishing my truthful petition advert, as they [the trustees] knew that this would trick Temple members into thinking my allegations of racism must be false, because the prominent personalities wouldn’t have taken a photograph with the trustees, and the Mercury wouldn’t have apologised, if the trustees were in the wrong. As intended by the trustees, the Mercury’s report [and photograph] turned Temple members against me, and I was insulted, ridiculed and harassed to the point that I had to stop attending the Temple, after which, I was compelled to create Panjabi podcasts and a Panjabi news report, in a last-ditch attempt to clarify the truth of the matter to Sikhs across Leicester, and salvage what was left of my reputation”. The Trustees blackmailed three newspapers In January and July 2017, the trustees used charity money to instruct Rich and Carr Solicitors to send baseless legal notices to three Panjabi newspapers that published Onkar’s petition adverts. Onkar explains, “the blackmail letters [legal notices] denied my true allegations of racism, claimed my petition adverts were highly defamatory, and threatened the newspapers with defamation proceedings, if they failed to publish front-page apologies and pay substantial damages. The trustees knew that my petition adverts were truthful, so they had no reason to demand the apologies and damages. Consequently, the trustees committed the criminal offence of blackmail, under section 21 of the Theft Act 1968, as they made unwarranted demands [for undue apologies] with menaces [threatening baseless legal action for defamation], with a view to make a financial gain [receive undue damages], which would have caused a financial loss to the victims [the three newspapers]. In February 2017, the three newspapers rightly refused to meet the trustees’ unlawful demands, but the trustees harassed them, by sending another legal notice in July 2017 and instructing their representative Gurmit Kang to send intimidating email threats. In Gurmit Kang’s email dated 11th August 2017, he boasted about consulting top defamation solicitors Carter-Ruck, attached an incomplete draft of a defamation claim, as well as, the proposed apology wording, to force the newspaper into apologising, but this didn’t work, as the newspaper stood its ground, refused to be bullied and put Gurmit Kang in his place, in it’s email response [to Gurmit Kang]”. The Trustees used charity money to pay for unjustified legal expenses In a statement submitted to the Birmingham High Court, trustee Amrik Gill clarified that since April 2016, the trustees have spent £4750 of charity money on legal expenses. Evidently, some of this money was spent on consulting Carter-Ruck [top defamation solicitors], with which, Amrik claims to have exchanged, “40 emails and telephone calls”. Onkar argues, “The trustees are the ones who first defamed me [in newspapers], which caused me to publish the truthful petition adverts [in the same newspapers], so on what basis did the trustees use charity money to consult Carter-Ruck, with regards to suing me for defamation, when they’re the one’s who defamed me? I firmly believe that the trustees had conspired to start a defamation claim against me, purely to teach me a lesson [for opposing and exposing the trustees’ wrongdoings], through causing me to suffer further financial losses”. In June 2017, Onkar started a High Court claim against the trustees, which sought their removal for breaches of duties. Onkar claims, “Instead of immediately resigning, the power-hungry trustees again instructed solicitors [using charity money], and drafted a dishonest defence, which shamelessly stated, “It is denied that Joginder Singh ever mistreated non-Sikh visitors”, which is untrue based on my video [footage] alone, because it proves that Joginder had mistreated the White woman, to the point of crying, on that day. By blackmailing newspapers, consulting Carter-Ruck and defending my High Court claim with a dishonest defence, the immoral trustees used thousands of pounds [of charity money], to pay for unjustified legal expenses, simply to cover-up racism and their gross mismanagement of the Temple". Five Trustees lied to the High Court to claim undue legal costs Onkar claims five trustees have lied to the High Court to claim thousands of pounds, in undue legal costs from Onkar, as he clarifies, “[trustee] Amrik Gill claimed that between April and August 2016, he’d spent fifty hours, on examining my videos and podcasts, for which he wants me to pay him £950. This is a lie, because my video [news report] and podcasts were released after 7th September 2016, so how could Amrik have examined them, before they were even released? Shamelessly, four other trustees have also claimed £2,280, for the exact same reason. I’ve fully disputed their bogus bill of costs, and I will expose their lies at the upcoming hearing”. The Trustees ‘re-elected themselves’ for another six years Onkar states, “In accordance with the Temple’s Constitution, an election was due to be held in June 2017, but anticipating that they [the trustees] would lose [due to their bad track record], the trustees held a ‘secret’ election at the Annual General Meeting, to which approximately, two-hundred pre-selected ‘voters’ [The trustees’ friends, relatives and supporters] were invited, to ‘elect’ the trustees, for a whopping six years [for two full terms, not the usual one term allowed by the Temple’s Constitution]. Evidently, the trustees are power-hungry people, who will do anything to retain control of the Temple and charity money”. The Trustees are unfit to be charity trustees Referring to the Temple’s President, Onkar states, “Despite being a local councilor, who is responsible for serving many non-Sikhs in his constituency, Ajmer Basra recklessly ignored the mistreatment of non-Sikhs at the Temple, over an eighteen-month period, which alone proves that he is unfit to be a trustee. The rest of them [the trustees] are equally bad, for dishonouring Sikh teachings and breaching the Sikh Code of Conduct, through covering-up racism and engaging in dishonest and immoral activities [harassment, defamation, blackmail, abuse of charity money and lying to the High Court], so they must be removed and disqualified”. Charity beneficiaries and charity money are at risk Onkar states, “If the trustees can stoop to harassing, defaming and claiming undue legal costs from me, which is what they have done, what’s stopping them from harming others [charity beneficiaries], who oppose their [the trustees’] wrongdoings and mismanagement in the future? Moreover, on 28th December 2017, the trustees announced in the Mercury [newspaper] that they plan to rebuild the Temple at a significant cost of £5 million pounds, most likely because they want to improve their well-deserved bad reputations. As the trustees have already squandered thousands of pounds of charity money [by paying for unjustified legal expenses], how can they be expected to manage a project of this scale? Also, I’m extremely worried that [trustees] Ajmer and Amrik will steal charity money to defend my ongoing defamation claim, which is against them personally [they’re not allowed to use charity money to defend the defamation claim]. Considering that Amrik has already tried stealing money from me [by claiming undue legal costs], and Ajmer had authorised the unjustified legal expenses from charity money, which in my view, equates to having authorised theft from charity funds, how can they, or any of the trustees for that matter, be allowed to continue handling charity money?” The Charity Commission is not an effective regulator On 30th September 2017, Onkar had sent a bundle consisting of over four hundred pages to the Charity Commission, which fully detailed and evidenced the trustees’ breaches of the Temple’s Constitution, the Sikh Code of Conduct and the Charity Commission’s regulations. In his application, Onkar had requested that the Charity Commission either removes the trustees, or gives Onkar permission to start charity proceedings. Onkar alleges, “Unbelievably, on 14th December 2017, the Charity Commission refused to remove the trustees and failed to authorise charity proceedings, for absolutely irrelevant reasons, which suggest that the case manager who’d dealt with my application, hadn’t even read the key material for consideration. Consequently, I’ve applied to the High Court for permission to start charity proceedings, and a hearing is due to take place shortly. Having completely mishandled my complaints, the Charity Commission has failed to ensure the trustees’ compliance with the charity’s governing documents, and therefore the Charity Commission is not an effective regulator”. ENDS For further information, please read the petition updates below.  Onkar Singh

Guru Nanak Gurudwara (Leics) Sangat
528 supporters
This petition won 3 days ago

Petition to Human Rights Campaign, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, Shehbaz Sharif, Muniba Mazari, Mian saqib Nisar, Mansoor Ali Shah, Ban Ki-moon (Secretary-General of the United Nations), United Nations, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, Parliament of Pakistan

Justice delayed is justice denied. Hang the murderer of Zainab to death!

 This petition is related to the rape and murder of Zainab Amin, a girl from Kasur Pakistan. We demand of the murderer to death.  Unfortunately enough, we are living in era where the major news of murders and sexual assaults aren't a surpise anymore nor a matter which we concern anymore because its common and its ok if it happens. Because the whole world is going through it. Isn't it? But indeed our failure to understand that our quietness in such matters is basically adding fuel to the fire is yet another big problem.  This has now resulted in worsening the situation and the sexual assault and murder of a 7 y/o angel, Zainab, in Punjab,Pakistan clearly indicates the level of humanity we have undoubtedly reached to. Found raped and murdered on a pile of heap on Tuesday, five days after she was kidnapped from her area while she was on her way to Madersah  and her parents being out of the country to perform Umrah, left the whole nation dumb and disheartened. What a cruel and atrocious world to be lived in! The CCTV footages clearly shows that she went with the man without doing any protest, clearing up the situation that it must be someone whom she used to know. But of what use are those footages if the concerned authorities have not been able to find the murderer even after 24 hours? Or are they waiting for another Zainab to go through the same? Adding more, the city she belongs to(Kasur) have been reported with such cases before, I repeat ONLY reported cases because belonging to an Eastern family, your family name is spoiled if such thing happens to you,  so many of the case or majority as it should be said are not even reported. But thanks to the laziness of the concerned authorities, such matters have never ever resolved and will never  in future, if the person(s) or group(s) behind such cases are not given the punishments a/c to the Laws of the nation. As in Islam, the punishment is to that person to death, we demand the authorities to do same with the murderer of Zainab and that too in public so that no one be ever able again to commit such a pathetic crime, no Zainab be ever facing the same, no family be deprived of their name. Also this must be done as soon as possible because justice delayed is justice denied. Its a high time now that we should stop considering sexual abuse(either verbal, social or physical) as a taboo subject anymore and in this regard, we should raise our voices as much as we can.  More power to your family, Zainab. May no more Zainab pass through the same. We I'll try our best to get you justice.  

Summaiyya Waseem
46,900 supporters
Update posted 4 days ago

Petition to Minister for Women and Equalities Penny Mordaunt MP, Minister for Women Victoria Atkins MP

Open civil partnerships to all

We’re Rebecca and Charles, we have a toddler called Eden, a baby called Ariel, and we want to cement and celebrate our relationship by having a civil partnership. But we can’t because the Civil Partnership Act 2004 states: ‘Two people are not eligible to register as civil partners of each other if … they are not of the same sex.’ We met in 2010, became engaged in 2013, and together we were involved in the fight for same-sex marriage within our community. It is fantastic social progress that couples can now marry regardless of sex or sexual orientation. We’ve been left, however, with a hangover from this important reform: Civil partnerships are still only available to same-sex couples. This limits the choice for mixed-sex couples, like us, who want to form a civil partnership - a modern institution that provides similar legal status and financial protections as marriage. The current system doesn’t make sense and needs to be brought into line with places such as Holland and New Zealand where couples can choose between marriage and civil partnership. Opening civil partnerships to all would bring the law up to date with the reality of family life: 3 million cohabiting couples with 2 million dependent children, all of whom currently lack the protection of marriage and choice of civil partnership. From a personal perspective, the legacy of marriage – that it treated women as property for centuries, excluded same-sex couples until 2014, and still leaves room only for fathers’ names on marriage certificates – means that marriage is not an option for us. We want to raise our children as equal partners and feel that a civil partnership – a modern, symmetrical institution – sets the best example for them. Sadly, the government has taken a different view. But with your support, we mounted a successful legal challenge to their position. In June 2018, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the current situation is discriminatory, cannot be justified, and is therefore unlawful. Consequently, the judges made a 'Declaration of Incompatibility,' giving the Government both the duty and the power to equalise civil partnerships.  Now we need to turn our legal win into a political win. The Minister for Women and Equalities, Penny Mordant MP, has already publicly assured the UK’s leading LGBT organisation, Stonewall, that civil partnerships will be retained for same-sex couples.  Therefore, there is only one option to answer the Supreme Court's call for equality: to extend civil partnerships to all. So we're pressing Ms. Mordaunt to open civil partnerships to all either by introducing fast-track legislation or by supporting Conservative MP Tim Loughton’s private members’ bill. We've already generated extensive cross-party parliamentary support for our cause. The London Assembly unanimously passed a motion supporting mixed-sex civil partnerships, and the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is in favour of opening civil partnerships to all.  The forces in favour of reform now significantly outnumber those who remain opposed. The tide turned some time ago and there is only so long that the government can continue to swim against it. We won’t rest until the government recognises that opening civil partnerships to mixed-sex couples is fair and popular, and good for families and children. We are confident that it will, eventually, recognise this clear logic. To help us make #equalcivilpartnerships a reality, we ask you to please do the following: 1. Please sign and share this petition, telling the Minister for Women and Equalities that you support opening up civil partnerships to all: http://www.change.org/civilpartnershipsforall 2. Write to your MP and ask them to support Tim Loughton’s private members’ bill, entitled Civil Partnerships, Marriages and Deaths (Registration Etc.) Bill 2017-19, which would give mixed-sex couples the right to a civil partnership, as well as including mother's names on marriage certificates. 3. Please support our efforts by making a financial contribution to the campaign: https://www.gofundme.com/ECPcampaigns We'll keep you updated with our progress.  From the bottom of our hearts, we thank you for all your support. We literally could never have gotten this far without the incredible support from tens of thousands of people, like you, who, like us, desperately want to see civil partnerships made available to all couples.  Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan ---------------------------- Like our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/equalcivilpartnerships/ Follow us on Twitter:  @EqualCPs Use #equalcivilpartnerships #equallove    

Charles Keidan and Rebecca Steinfeld
142,382 supporters