Settling Discrimination Claims - The Hidden Dangers

All strands of the discrimination legislation contain aconsequences is likely to frighten one not accustomed
prohibition on "victimisation", preventing an employerto legal controversy. It will provoke, not a dispassionate
from subjecting an employee to any detriment bybalancing of strengths and weaknesses, but fear and
reason of the fact that the employee has made anperhaps panic."
allegation or claim of unlawful discrimination. WithoutAccordingly, the Council had gone further than
such protection from reprisals, the discriminationnecessary to protect its interests in the litigation.
legislation would be significantly weakened.Comment
In the case of St Helens Borough Council v Derbyshire,The St Helens decision is a stark warning for
the House of Lords had to determine whether, byemployers that they need to tread extremely carefully
exerting pressure on employees to settle an equal paywhen defending discrimination claims, putting
claim, the Council had committed an act of victimisation.themselves in the shoes of the claimant and
The Factsconsidering whether their actions may be construed as
The case concerned 510 school dinner ladies, whocausing unnecessary distress or intimidation.
argued that they were entitled to the same rate ofHowever, employers also need to consider their legal
pay as road sweepers. The majority of the cateringobligation to notify all affected staff if a genuine
staff reached a settlement with the Council but aredundancy situation does arise. In light of the St
group of 38 brought an equal pay claim in theHelens decision, it is suggested that letters to the
Employment Tribunal. Shortly before the hearing, thewhole workforce should only be sent as a last resort,
Council wrote to all of the catering staff stating that, ifwhere cut backs have become inevitable.
the claims were successful, the additional cost wouldAND IN OTHER NEWS...
result in the need to cut back on the provision ofEngland goes smoke-free
school meals and this would lead to redundancies. TheAt 6am yesterday (1st July 2007), the ban on smoking
dinner ladies argued that this correspondence wasin workplace (and enclosed public places) came into
intimidating and had caused them to suffer distressforce. Under the legislation, employers face financial
and reproach from colleagues. They therefore pursuedpenalties if they fail to take reasonable steps to
an additional claim of victimisation.prevent smoking in the workplace, or fail to display
The Decisionprominent "no-smoking" signs at the entrance to their
The central issue in the case was whether the Councilpremises.
had made an honest and reasonable attempt to settleThe end of statutory dispute resolution procedures?
the proceedings, or whether it had exerted undueThe statutory disciplinary and grievance procedures
pressure on the employees, so as to amount to ahave proved unpopular with just about everyone who
detriment by reason of them continuing their equal payhas had to operate or interpret them, including
claims.employers, legal advisors and the Tribunals themselves.
In finding that the existence of a "detriment" must beBuilding upon the findings of the Gibbons Review, the
assessed from the point of view of the alleged victim,DTI has published a consultation document: "Success
the House of Lord concluded that the Council wasat Work: Resolving disputes in the workplace", the
guilty of victimisation. Two issues tipped the balance incentral proposal of which is the abolition of the
the employees' favour:statutory procedures. The consultation process has so
Firstly, the Council had written to all catering staff,far revealed wide support for this proposal and so it
including those who had already settled. The obviouslooks like the statutory procedures have had their day.
intention and/or effect of this was to bring indirectWhat is less certain is when they will disappear and
pressure on the dinners ladies through the anger andwhat will replace them?
disapproval of their colleagues.DRC 'names and shames'
Secondly, the Council had written to the employeesThe amended DDA places a duty on public authorities
directly, rather than to their legal representatives. In theto publish a disability equality scheme (DES), showing
Tribunal's opinion: "A professional representative canhow they intend to eliminate unlawful discrimination and
be expected to react calmly to such a letter. But...apromote equality of opportunity for disabled people.
letter pointing to the likelihood of dire, unpopular