Employment Law Update: Discrimination at Work

Employment Law Update: Discrimination at Work

DISCRIMINATION AT WORK

The recent case of Sky Sports and Andy Gray conveniently brings into focus the  discrimination legislation.

It is clear that less favourable treatment of women constitutes sex discrimination, which is unlawful.  People need to be careful not only with what they say, but what they write.  The excessive use of e-mail communication and social network chatter makes the possibility of careless words greater than ever.

The motto has to be "think before you speak or before you Tweet".

You may find it helpful to have the background to the law of discrimination which has recently altered.

Discrimination Law

On the 1st October 2010 the Equality Act 2010 came into effect.  This consolidates and revises the existing law on discrimination some of which  has been with us for nearly 40 years.

The revised wording of the legislation is likely to throw up many problems.

The legal meaning of discrimination has changed, and some of the familiar concepts of discrimination such as harassment and victimisation have also changed.  The law now lists a series of protected characteristics.  In simple terms it is now the case that "a person discriminates against another if, because of a protected characteristic, they treat the other less favourably".

The list of protected characteristics include :-

(i)         Age.

(ii)         Disability.

(iii)        Gender reassignment.

(iv)        Marriage and civil partnership.

(v)        Pregnancy and maternity.

(vi)        Race.

(vii)       Religion or religious belief.

(viii)      Sex or sexual orientation.

A discrimination may be obvious. An example is an advertisement for a job headed  "Wanted Girl Friday". This  term  clearly should  no longer be used by any Employer because it discriminates  against  all male job applicants.

If the advert is not obviously discriminatory then a  claim can instead be made of indirect discrimination.  Section 19 of the Equality Act 2010 enables a Claimant to bring a claim of indirect discrimination if the Claimant can show that by virtue of their protected characteristic, they will be put at a relevant personal disadvantage by the Employer`s requirements.

An example is a job advertisement for "a recent school leaver".  Many persons would be entitled to complain that this is age discrimination because the job advertisement excluded the possibility for them to apply as  they left school years earlier  and are thus being excluded from applying for the vacancy.

Settlement of Disputes

The Equality Act 2010 will throw up many problems in the coming months.  The one that is currently giving cause for problems is the implementation of the provisions that apply to a Compromise Agreement.  As currently drafted, the provisions for Compromise Agreements appear to leave a loophole in the law when the parties want to settle a claim for discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.

As a result, the Law Society issued a Practice Note for Solicitors on Section 147 of the Equality Act 2010 on the 13th January 2011 drawing attention to the ambiguity in this Section, and outlining the alternatives that employers and employees' lawyers may have to use if any settlement of a discrimination claim is to be legally binding.  A Compromise Agreement precludes a claim to an Employment Tribunal if it is validly put into effect, but under the Equality Act wording,  substantial doubt has been introduced as to the status of the person who may advise the employee on a valid  Compromise Agreement.

At the present time, there is concern whether the Solicitor who was instructed by the employee to make a claim can validly then sign a Compromise Agreement as the requisite independent adviser necessary to make the Compromise Agreement a legally binding document on the employee.  As the purpose  of a Compromise Agreement is to create certainty and avoid the matter being referred to an Employment Tribunal, this uncertainty created by Section 147(5) of the Equality Act 2010 is to be deplored.

However, until that uncertainty is resolved, employers and employees will need to discuss with their Solicitor the risk involved in entering into any Compromise Agreement that refers to the Equality Act 2010, and  how to deal with that risk before concluding any Compromise of an Equality Act claim.

Should you require more information, please contact Chris Atkinson.