Recruitment
This Northern Ireland industrial tribunal decision is a good example of how an employer can indirectly discriminate against a female job applicant by making it a requirement to have a number of years' relevant experience within a narrow time frame, something that is more difficult for women who have been raising a family to achieve.
In Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce v Beck EAT/0141/10, the EAT held that the employment tribunal was entitled to find that, notwithstanding the inherently unlikely nature of an age discrimination claim on the facts, the employer's deliberate use of the word "younger" in a person specification, contrary to expert advice, was sufficient to shift the burden of proof to the employer.
Ceri Hughes, David Parry, and Carly Mather, associates at Addleshaw Goddard, detail the latest rulings.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that the use of the word "younger" in the person specification for the job vacancy that had been created after the claimant had been dismissed was sufficient to raise the suspicion of age discrimination and shift the burden of proof to the employer.
In Keane v Investigo and others EAT/0389/09, the EAT held that an experienced accountant who applied for jobs aimed at recently qualified accountants that she did not genuinely want was unable to complain of having suffered any disadvantage when she was not put forward for them.
In Wolf v Stadt Frankfurt Am Main [2010] IRLR 244 ECJ, the ECJ held that the German Government's restriction on recruitment as a firefighter to those aged 30 or under does not give rise to age discrimination because it constitutes a proportionate "genuine and determining occupational requirement" in pursuit of a legitimate aim, within the meaning of art.4(1) of the Equal Treatment Framework Directive.
In Cheltenham Borough Council v Laird [2009] IRLR 621 HC, the High Court dismissed claims that a former employee had fraudulently or negligently failed to disclose information about her health in a pre-employment questionnaire. She had answered the questions accurately and truthfully, and as a reasonable lay person with her medical history would have answered them.
The European Court of Justice has held that an employer's public statement of a discriminatory recruitment policy is direct discrimination contrary to the Race Directive (2000/43/EC).
A review of a number of recent employment tribunal decisions suggests that some employers remain unaware of the implications of, or are struggling with, the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/1031), which became law on 1 October 2006. The decisions also demonstrate the approach that the tribunals might take to the question of justification of discrimination and to the assessment of injury to feelings compensation.
In Przybylska v Modus Telecom Ltd EAT/0566/06 the Employment Appeal Tribunal held that a tribunal was wrong to imply into a contract a term that the employer could carry out a review of the probationary period within a reasonable time of the expiry of the probationary period.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to recruitment.