Equality, diversity and human rights >
Sex discrimination
Joanne Magill, associate, and Claire Benson and Ceri Hughes, managing associates, at Addleshaw Goddard detail the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that "special treatment" afforded to a woman in connection with pregnancy or childbirth under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 must constitute a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of compensating her for the disadvantages occasioned by pregnancy or maternity leave.
In this case, the industrial tribunal in Northern Ireland ordered a care worker's former employer to pay her £9,500 for sex discrimination after it failed to provide her with a reference.
The Court of Appeal has held that the tribunal was correct to decide that it had jurisdiction to hear claims of unfair dismissal and sex discrimination by two British employees who worked for the Ministry of Defence in Belgium and the Netherlands.
In Shackletons Garden Centre Ltd v Lowe EAT/0161/10, the EAT held that an employment tribunal had insufficient evidence for its finding that an employee returning from maternity leave suffered indirect sex discrimination when her employer required her to work weekend shifts on the same basis as the other sales staff.
In St Andrews Catholic Primary School and others v Blundell EAT/0330/09, the EAT held that the appropriate award of compensation for injury to a victimised employee's feelings was £14,000, not £22,000, reflecting that it was a serious case falling within the middle Vento band. The tribunal's award of £5,000 in aggravated damages was, however, appropriate.
In Johal v Equality and Human Rights Commission EAT/0541/09, the EAT held that the employer's failure to inform an employee on maternity leave of a job vacancy was not an act of sex discrimination.
Annabel Mackay, managing associate at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
This week's case of the week, provided by DLA Piper, covers sex and pregnancy discrimination and constructive dismissal.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that, on the facts of the case, an employer did not commit sex discrimination against an employee on maternity leave when an administrative error meant that she was not informed of a job vacancy.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to sex discrimination.