Activity Case 2: Equal Opportunity A woman claimed that she was offered a job but the offer was withdrawn before she commenced employment because she 'failed' a pre-employment medical examination, and the employer claimed its job offer was subject to passing that examination. The woman's 'disabilities' included obesity and a past knee injury, and the examination had indicated that she would not be capable of performing the inherent requirements of the job, The job description described the 70% office-based and 30% site-based. Its duties included resolving customer complaints onsite, which could include 'traversing sites which are often difficult to negotiate due to uneven terrain and disturbed ground conditions'. These sites could include 'national parks, dense bush land and construction sites'. The New South Wales Administrative Decisions Tribunal examined the evidence and concluded that the woman would not have been able to perform these requirements of the job, and that they were inherent requirements of it. Therefore, that employer did not discriminate on the ground of disability by withdrawing the job offer. The significance of this case is that the employer successfully defended its decision because it had relied on objective evidence, in this case a thorough and accurate job description and a pre- employment medical examination. Cases involving disability discrimination often examine what are the 'inherent requirements' of a job in considerable detail, so an employer needs to be well prepared Questions: 1. What is the issue of equal opportunity in the case presented above? 2. How do you assess the issue of equal opportunity and the law? 3. What are the conflicting conclusions in the case? 4. Is obesity can be a disability discrimination? 5. If this happened in the Philippines, cite any government law to support or disprove the resolution of the case. . Support your explanations with articles provided in the Labor Code