UK: Employment And Immigration Update November 2017

Last Updated: 4 December 2017
Article by Ogletree Deakins

Can the position of a potted plant on a desk constitute an act of race discrimination?

Employment law sees its fair share of unusual and wonderful cases, and the following is no exception. It shows how the norm to one person can be extremely offensive to another, resulting in a very lengthy and expensive court battle before the employment tribunal. A worker for Westminster Council alleged he had been subjected to direct race discrimination, racial harassment, and victimisation. Mr Benyam Kenbata, who describes himself as a Black British African, made 29 allegations against his employer relating to an overgrown potted plant on his manager's desk.

Facts of the Case:

  •  On 2 April 2014, Mr Kenbata wrote an email to his head of department, Mr Low, complaining that the potted plant on his manager's desk made it difficult to communicate with colleagues in certain sections of the office. He said it blocked his view and was a form of racial segregation.
  •  On 3 April 2014, Mr Low responded to Mr Kenbata's email in person and discussed the issue with him in the open plan office.
  •  The HR department became involved and suggested the real problem was the size of the potted plant and that it had grown too high. They rejected the claim that it was a race issue.
  •  It is unclear what happened after this, however, Mr Kenbata left his employment at the council in June of 2014 and issued employment tribunal proceedings. He made 29 different complaints against the Council including a number of specific matters in relation to the potted plant.
  •  At the tribunal, all but one of Mr. Kenbata's claims were dismissed. The only claim to succeed - purely based on a technicality - was that of victimisation. The tribunal refused to make any order for compensation in Mr Kenbata's favour, as they believed he had acted in bad faith. The concession made by the tribunal was that his manager, Mr Low, should have conducted the conversation regarding the potted plant with Mr Kenbata in private and not in the open plan office.
  •  Having incurred legal fees of over £50,000 defending Mr Kenbata's claims, the Council sought a costs order. The tribunal acceded and ordered Mr Kenbata to pay £10,000 in costs to the Council.

Judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal

Mr Kenbata appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT), which remitted the case back to the original employment tribunal on the grounds that it had not properly addressed certain allegations.

The EAT found that the tribunal had to address the racial harassment claim on the basis that Mr Kenbata had been acting in good faith throughout. On that basis, Mr Low's discussion with Mr Kenbata in the open plan office was determined to have been racial harassment after all. Mr Kenbata was awarded £1,000 compensation.

The decision of the employment tribunal on remission

The tribunal declined to order the Council to refund Mr Kenbata his tribunal fees due to the Supreme Court's recent decision to declare tribunal fees unlawful. Based on that decision, he would be receiving his fees back anyway.

The tribunal ultimately found no evidence that "race was an issue in the office" and upheld the £10,000 costs award due to Mr Kenbata acting unreasonably in respect of his other claims.

Likely impact on your organisation

This case is an example of how employees' perception can cause conflict within a workplace. An action that one party may think is innocent and harmless may be viewed as offensive and discriminatory to another. Employers may want to ensure that they deal with any grievances in a sensitive and serious manner in accordance with company policies and procedures. In particular, issues should be discussed in private on a confidential basis.

Teacher awarded over £50,000 in compensation after bosses 'brushed off' sexual assault

A former special needs teacher at Warren School in Suffolk has won her claim of unfair dismissal and indirect sex discrimination. Only identified as "Ms C," the teacher was awarded more than £50,000 after it was suggested by her manager, Ms Bird, the head teacher, that it was part of her job to deal with "challenging behaviour."

Facts of the Case:

  •  Ms C was a teacher at Warren School, which is a school for pupils with learning difficulties. She had taught students with learning difficulties for almost two years.
  •  On 16 June 2016, Ms C was sexually assaulted by a 17 year-old male pupil who put his hand up her dress and intimately grabbed her. When told to stop, he slapped her on the arm several times. Then, when she walked away, he ran after her and pushed her in the back.
  •  Ms C, who was upset by the incident, reported the assault to management. Ms Bird, the head teacher, made a comment "to the effect that it [was] part of the job to deal with challenging behaviour".
  •  Ms C returned to work the next day but had to go home in the afternoon as she was too upset by the incident. She tried to attend a course the following week but broke down in tears and again left early. At that point Ms C began a period of absence from work from which she did not return.
  •  On 7 July 2016, Ms C attended a return-to-work interview and was left "utterly devastated" after being shown a document entitled, "Advice for Working with Pupil A." She felt the document implied that she had acted inappropriately and criticised her for wearing a dress in the classroom. Ms C was told that the parent of the child did not think that the assault was a sexual assault, and, although the pupil had since been moved to a new school, the head teacher failed to ensure that a note of the incident had been passed on.
  •  During the time Ms C was signed off from work, she was referred to specialist counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy by her general practitioner. She was suffering from a "severe range of anxiety symptoms" and "significant emotional distress and she remained unfit to go back to her role". Ms C resigned from her employment on 13 December 2016 and claimed indirect sex discrimination and unfair dismissal at the employment tribunal.

The tribunal Judgment

  •  The tribunal found that by expecting Ms C to continue working with the pupil that assaulted her, given his known sexualised behavior, the employer was requiring Ms C to work in an environment where a sexual assault could take place. This therefore amounted to indirect sex discrimination.
  •  Other events that took place between the sexual assault and the resignation "amounted to a breach of the implied term that an employer must maintain mutual trust and confidence". Therefore, Ms C was entitled to compensation for being constructively dismissed.

Since the incident, Ms C has not been able to work full time. She has trouble sleeping and suffers from depression, which has led to difficulties with her partner. The employment tribunal awarded Ms C £33,642 for indirect sex discrimination and £18,851 for constructive unfair dismissal

Key points to note from this case

All employers owe a duty of care to their employees. This duty covers a wide range of obligations, from stopping harassment to preventing injury in the workplace. It is an employer's duty to prevent any psychological or physical harm occurring to an employee during the course of his or her employment. Not only did the employer breach its duty of care to Ms C by expecting her to work in an environment where a sexual assault could take place, it also breached the mutual trust and confidence between employer and employee in the way  that Ms Bird, the head teacher, handled the situation. In this case, the employer also owed a duty of care - distinct from its employment obligations - to the pupil and his new school. Ms Bird failed to take account of that when she failed to ensure a note of the sexual assault had been passed on to the new school.

Pledge to review and protect pregnant women and new mothers from redundancy

In January of 2017, the Government pledged to protect working mothers from redundancy in its response to a report on maternity discrimination. The Women and Equalities Select Committee carried out a report that found that the number of new mothers forced to leave their jobs had almost doubled to 54,000 since 2005. The Committee called for a system modeled after one used in Germany, in which women must not be made redundant from the time they notify their employers of pregnancy through to six months after they return to work. There are very limited exceptions in specific circumstances. A charity called Maternity Action has recently accused the Government of failing to act on its pledge and has carried out its own analysis to show that the current laws are insufficient. Government ministers have not reviewed the issue since January, nor provided a timeframe for doing so.

According to the report:

  • IIn 2016, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) "found that 77% of pregnant women and new mothers had experienced discrimination or negative experiences during pregnancy".
  •  One in 20 mothers are made redundant during pregnancy, maternity leave, or when they return to work.
  •  Many redundancies are not genuine and are merely called "redundancies" in order to avoid discrimination claims.
  • "Maternity Action's online information on redundancy and maternity was viewed 30,000 times in the first six months of 2017", highlighting that there is a desperate need for information on this issue.

The charity is calling for improvements in guidance for employers, more information for women and support for advice services. There are 12 recommendations at the end of the Maternity Action report that encourage employers to "evaluate the retention rates for women one year after returning to work from maternity leave, as part of their gender pay gap reporting". The charity recommends extending the timeframe in which women can make pregnancy-related discrimination claims to the employment tribunal from three months to six months and for the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) to update its guidance information on redundancy during pregnancy and maternity.

In other news...

  1. On 10 November 2017, otherwise known as "Equal Pay Day", data was revealed to show that the gender pay gap is widening for women in their twenties. On average, men in this age group earn 5.5 percent more than their female colleagues. Research from the Fawcett Society shows that this has increased by over 4 percent since 2011. Combining all age groups, the gap is 14.1 percent. Due to the difference in salaries, women will essentially work for free between 10 November and the end of the year.
  2. A former employee of the British Council has lost her claim for unfair dismissal after she was sacked for calling Prince George "the face of white privilege". Angela Gibbins entered into a discussion on her social media account after a third party posted a photograph of Prince George and commented that he looked like "a f***ing d***head". She said, "that cheeky grin is the (already locked-in) innate knowledge that he is Royal, rich, advantaged". Gibbins' comments sparked an uproar after garnering widespread media coverage. She then reluctantly sent an apology to Kensington Palace and was suspended the next day. The employment tribunal found that the British Council was right to terminate Gibbins' employment for "reckless lack of judgment, inexcusable in someone in a senior position" and agreed it was sufficient to be held as gross misconduct.
  3. An employment tribunal has found that a charity unfairly and constructively dismissed an employee who felt she had been bullied and undermined by her manager. Janette Coyle, a social worker, resigned from her role at Action for Children after she was made to work in a small office with little natural light. She had a fear of small spaces due to an incident in 1997, when she found a body of a person who had hanged themselves. The tribunal judge said that although she did not believe that those managing Coyle had been made fully aware of her fear of small spaces and the traumatic incident from her past, they had still, on a number of occasions, been "clumsy and tactless" in dealing with her concerns.
  4. Employees that work for companies that have adopted the UK living wage will have received an inflation-beating pay rise recently. The pay rate rose by 3.6 percent to £8.75 an hour in the UK and 4.6 percent to £10.20 in London. The increase in the living wage is independently calculated and designed to reflect the "real cost of living in the UK and London." More than 150 employers have newly committed to the living wage over the past few weeks and they join around 3,600 employers that have already signed up.
  5. A teaching assistant who was dismissed for raising concerns about 11 year-olds being shown disturbing footage of the 9/11 terror attacks has won her claim for unfair dismissal against her former school. The videos, which showed people jumping to their deaths, had an age advisory for individuals over the age of 18. The children had been studying "Out of the Blue", a poem by Simon Armitage, which reflects on the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York. Suriyah Bi raised the issue with management the following day and was dismissed hours later, less than two weeks after she began her position at the school. Bi turned down a compensation offer from the school and instead took the case to the employment tribunal, which found that she had had been unfairly dismissed due to whistleblowing.

Immigration

ECJ rules on non-EU residency rights

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that a European citizen who became a British citizen did not lose the right to have her spouse from Algeria live with her in Britain under European law. The ECJ took five months to deliberate on whether the Home Office was wrong to refuse Garcia Ormazábal's husband permanent residency in the UK.

Factual Background

  •  Mr Toufik Lounes, an Algerian national, entered the UK in 2010 on a six-month visitor visa and then overstayed illegally. Ms Perla Nerea Garcia Ormazábal, a Spanish national, moved to the UK as a student in 1996 and began working in the UK in 2004. She became naturalised as a British citizen giving her dual nationality in 2009.
  •  Following their marriage in April of 2014, Mr Lounes applied for a residence card as a family member of a European Economic Area (EEA) national.
  •  In May of 2014, Mr Lounes was served with notice to remove him from the UK, as he had breached immigration controls.His application for residence had also been refused. He was told that Ms Garcia Ormazábal was no longer regarded as an EEA national since she had become a British national and therefore was no longer entitled to rely on the rights of free movement under EU law.
  •  Mr Lounes brought a claim before the High court against the decision. Having concerns surrounding whether the issue was compatible with EU law, the High Court asked the ECJ to provide a ruling on the issue.
  •  Yves Bot, the advocate general said that "Under Article 21(1) [of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)] Member States must permit EU citizens who are not their nationals to move and reside within their territory with their spouse and, possibly, certain members of their family who are not EU citizens". He claimed that it would be "illogical and problematic" for the British Government to deny EU citizens' rights to which they were accustomed under the TFEU once they had obtained their British passports.

This opinion highlights how complex the rules are governing the rights of EU nationals and their families living in other member states. In terms of Brexit negotiations, it is yet to be seen whether the rights of free movement will be lost. This issue will ultimately depend on the terms of the agreement reached between the UK and the EU.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions