Equality in employment
Protected characteristics
Section 4 Equality Act 2010
Age (s5)
Disability (s6)
Gender reassignment (s7) – proposing to undergo, has undergone or is undergoing a reassignment process
Marriage/civil partnership (s8) – engaged is not sufficient, divorced/dissolved not protected
Race (s9) – colour, nationality ethic or national origins, racial groups (Jews race and religion)
Religion/belief (s10) – religious group, lack of religious belief, or having beliefs – must be genuinely held
Sex (s11)
Sexual orientation (s12)
Pregnancy/maternity (s18)
Types of discrimination claims
Direct discrimination
Indirect discrimination
Harassment
Victimisation
Instructing, causing, inducing or helping discrimination
Unlawful acts
Discrimination in:
Recruitment
Promotion
Dismissal
Harassment
Post-employment matters
Subjecting person to a detriment
Direct Discrimination (“DD”)
Eligibility
Time limit = 3 months from act of discrimination – just needs to give written notice to employer of intent to bring claim no need to commence
Unlawful act
Discrimination in:
Recruitment
Promotion
Dismissal
Harassment
Post-employment matters
Subjecting person to a detriment
Protected characteristic?
Identify the Protected characteristic (“PC”) (e.g. sex, disability, age, pregnancy)
Have they been treated differently/less favourably?
Covers any disadvantage – does not require a tangible loss
Deprivation of choice is sufficient
Assumptions based on stereotype can be DD
Objective test: whether the complainant would have been treated differently and more favourably had it not been for the PC (i.e. the reason for the treatment must have been the PC)
If PC was at least one of the reasons for treatment = DD
Actual/hypothetical comparator – a person who does not share the same PC as the complainant, but who is (or assumed to be) not materially different from them – if the comparator has (or would have been) treated differently to the complainant, they have been treated less favourably.
Where a suitable comparator is not available, the court will use the hypothetical comparator
Reason why question – why was the complainant treated as he was? Was the treatment because of the PC? – important but only on the facts (not the motive itself)
Burden of proof?
Shifting burden of proof
Burden on claimant to show the facts that point to a breach of the Equality Act (balance of probabilities)
Burden on the respondent to show there was not a breach and offer an explanation (remember: no defence to DD)- subjective non-discriminatory reason for why they acted as they did
Occupational requirement exception?
Having regard to the nature/context of the work, it will not be DD if it can be shown that there is an occupational requirement for the act.
Requirement must be crucial to the post
Must not be a sham or pretext
Must be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim
Must be necessary for proper performance of the post
i.e. authenticity (black actors for black role),privacy/decency (same sex), public safety (culture or conflict)
NO DEFENCE
Vicarious liability?
Employer will be liable for the acts of its employee unless it took all reasonably practicable steps to stop or avoid the discrimination – DEFENCE to vicarious liability only (not to the DD itself) (Jones v Tower Boot Co / CC of Lincolnshire Police v Stubbs) (s109(4))
Remedies
Declaration of employee rights (like a judgment)
Recommendations (only in relation to that employee – cant give power to promote)
Compensation (no max)
Pecuniary losses – loss arising from the DD itself (put the C in position he would have been had it not been for the DD)
Aggravated damages – only where employer acted in high handed, malicious or insulting or oppressive manner
Injury to feeling – almost inevitable – compensatory in nature
Vento bands
lower band (min 500 max 6,600) – isolate incidents, less serious
middle band (min 6,600 max 19,800) – serious cases not meriting top
upper band (min 19,800 max 33,020) – only to most serious cases
example: Lokhova v Sherbank – awarded 4.5m and 3.2m in DD and harassment claim
Psychiatric/physical injury – compensation for any physical or mental injury caused by the DD – need medical evidence – risk of double recovery for injury to feeling/psychiatric
Exemplary damages – rare – arbitrary and outrageous use of executive power – most serious only
Deductions for: accelerated receipt, contributory act (also deduction for any overlapping claims)
Tribunal may award interest at ET rate = 8%
ACAS 25% increase/decrease
Indirect Discrimination
Eligibility
Time limit = 3 months from act of discrimination – just needs to give written notice to employer of intent to bring claim no need to commence
Unlawful act
Discrimination in:
Recruitment
Promotion
Dismissal
Harassment
Post-employment matters
Subjecting person to a detriment
Protected characteristic
PCP (provision, criterion or practice)
Covers formal and informal working practices
Allows for examination of policies and working practices that do not operate as absolute requirements for the role (e.g. working hours, recruitment selection, promotion)
PCP must apply equally to all
Employee at particular disadvantage compared to others?
Complainant must show that the PCP is a disadvantage to his group
Pool of comparison? – pool must be people with the same characteristics as the C (wrong pool = error in law)
Has C suffered a disadvantage?
Must suffer a disadvantage and show that the PCP caused that disadvantage
Disadvantage must arise in the employment field
Examples – not getting promoted or being dismissed
Defence
Can Employer show the PCP was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim? = DEFENCE
Balancing exercise between degree of discrimination and object/aim to be achieved taking into consideration all the circumstances
‘proportionate’ = appropriate and necessary (Homer v CC West Yorkshire Police)
Is there another way around the issue rather than the action taken? Yes = No defence
Burden of proof – on the employer to show that there is cogent evidence that the justification defence is made out
Remedies
Declaration of employee rights (like a judgment)
Recommendations (only in relation to that employee – cant give power to promote)
Compensation (no max)
Pecuniary losses – loss arising from the DD itself (put the C in position he would have been had it not been for the DD)
Aggravated damages – only where employer acted in high handed, malicious or insulting or oppressive manner
Injury to feeling – almost inevitable – compensatory in nature
Vento bands
lower band (min 500 max 6,600) – isolate incidents, less serious
middle band (min 6,600 max 19,800) – serious cases not meriting top
upper band (min 19,800 max 33,020) – only to most serious cases
example: Lokhova v Sherbank – awarded 4.5m and 3.2m in DD and harassment claim
Psychiatric/physical injury – compensation for any physical or mental injury caused by the DD – need medical evidence – risk of double recovery for injury to feeling/psychiatric
Exemplary damages – rare – arbitrary and outrageous use of executive power – most serious only
Deductions for: accelerated receipt, contributory act (also deduction for any overlapping claims)
Tribunal may award interest at ET rate = 8%
ACAS 25% increase/decrease
Disability Discrimination
Failure to make reasonable adjustments (s20, 21, 22)
Eligibility
Time limit = 3 months from act of discrimination – just needs to give written notice to employer of intent to bring claim no need to commence
Disability
Physical/mental impairment
No definition in the Act – given ordinary meaning
Not necessary to consider how the impairment was caused
Doesn’t include addictions or hay fever
Example: asthma, progressive diseases, depressions, OCD, eating disorders, cancer, dyslexia
Long term
Has lasted, or is likely to last, at least 12 months
To be answered as at the date of the DD allegations
‘Likely’ = could well happen (not just more likely than not) (i.e. 51%)
If they are likely to recur beyond 12 months after the first occurrence the condition is to be treated as being long term, even if gaps occur between flare ups
Substantial
no need to show substantial effect for progressive conditions (e.g. arthritis)– but need to show there is an effect
More than minor or trivial (s212(1))
Time to carry out activity, cumulative effects of the impairment, effect of behaviour, effect of environment – could be compared to a person without condition as comparator
Adverse effect on normal day to day activities
‘day to day activities’ given literal meaning, i.e. shopping, eating, getting dressed
Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis – includes activities relevant to participation in professional life including exams, and assessments
Making adjustments to enable the person to be able to do activities will not prevent finding that their overall ability has had an adverse effect
Focus on what they can’t do, or can only do with difficulty
NB. cancer, HIV/Aids, multiple sclerosis = do not need to satisfy disability definition, automatically classified as disabled on diagnosis
Unlawful act
Discrimination in:
Recruitment
Promotion
Dismissal
Harassment
Post-employment matters
Subjecting person to a detriment
Reasonable adjustments
Was employer under duty to make reasonable adjustments?
Employer can be liable for failing to take positive steps to overcome issues
Duty applies in recruitment, during all stages of...