Equality, diversity and human rights
In Pereira v The Post Office, a Southampton industrial tribunal rules that the Post Office, which had properly followed "full procedures", was not liable for the racial abuse suffered by an employee from a fellow employee. However, in Cooley v BRS Ltd, a Reading industrial tribunal rules that BRS had failed to properly implement its harassment policy and was liable for the racial abuse of one employee by another.
An employer who asked jobcentre staff to advertise a job as being one for a "lad" because it involved heavy lifting acted unlawfully, rules a Birmingham industrial tribunal (Chair: J G Haslam) in Equal Opportunities Commission v Grays Retailing Ltd.
In Automotive and Financial Group Ltd v Bark the EAT has held that a compensation award of £2,000 for injury to feelings to a trainee salesperson, who was dismissed after she was sexually harassed, fell within the bracket of permissible awards.
In Young v University of Edinburgh the EAT finds that an employer can establish a defence to an equal pay claim by showing that the difference in pay was genuinely due to an administrative error, which the employer could not rectify without creating further anomalies.
The principle of equal pay under Article 119 of the EC Treaty only applies where the comparator is in fact of the opposite sex, the EAT holds in Collins v Wilkin Chapman, overruling the decision of an industrial tribunal that a claim could be brought where the comparator is perceived to be of the opposite sex, but is the same sex biologically.
The exception to the temporal limitation in the Barber decision in respect of workers who have already brought legal proceedings "or made an equivalent claim" only applies where the claim had been made to an independent third party with power to make a determination, holds a Bristol industrial tribunal (Chair: C G Toomer) in Howard v Ministry of Defence.
In Stadt Lengerich v Helmig (15 December 1994) EOR60A, the European Court of Justice rules that there is no discrimination contrary to European Community law where a collective agreement provides that overtime supplements will be paid only when the normal working hours for full-time employees are exceeded.
It is not contrary to EC equal pay law to restrict the payment of premium overtime rates only to employees who work more than the designated number of normal full-time hours, holds the European Court of Justice in Stadt Lengerich v Helmig and five joined cases.
In Insitu Cleaning Co Ltd and another v Heads the EAT rejects an employer's argument that a single act cannot amount to sexual harassment until it has been done and rejected as "unwanted conduct".
In Insitu Cleaning Co Ltd v Heads (1 September 1994) EOR59B, the EAT rules that a remark about a woman's breasts subjected her to a detriment and was unlawfully discriminatory. The EAT recommends that the employers adopt a sexual harassment procedure to prevent future incidents.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to equality, diversity and human rights.