EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Justification; Disability Related Discrimination
The Claimant accepted ill-health retirement at 38, because his disabilities were such that he could no longer continue in post. He was entitled to a pension calculated as if he had worked on until retirement age, which was to be paid immediately upon retirement and without actuarial reduction, but based upon his pensionable salary at the date of ill-health retirement. At that date he was working half time, having reduced his hours by agreement to accommodate his disabilities. He complained that to pay him only half what a full-time employee would have had discriminated against him, being unfavourable treatment in consequence of something arising from his disability, contrary to s.15 Equality Act 2010. An ET accepted this case. On appeal, it was held that the Tribunal had failed to answer its own questions as to the meaning of ‘unfavourably’ and in addressing it applied the wrong test, adopted the wrong approach, failed to recognise that anyone who could legitimately claim ill-health retirement under the scheme had to be disabled, and reasoned from inappropriate analogies. As to justification, the ET appeared at one point to adopt the University’s aim as legitimate, but at another suggested that the justification was concerned solely with cost (a question which logically related to the aim, not to the means); analysed proportionality in part by considering the employer’s conduct in failing to consider potential discrimination (at a time when such discrimination was not prohibited), when it was the objective effect of a decision which fell for consideration, not the subjective processes by which it was adopted; and in part by postulating alternative means of achieving the aim without such discriminatory impact, none of which were identified or described sufficiently. The ET’s decision that the Claimant was unfavourably treated because of something arising in consequence of his disability could not stand, and it was remitted to a fresh Tribunal for complete rehearing.
Langstaff P J
[2015] ICR 1197, [2015] UKEAT 0415 – 14 – 2107, [2015] IRLR 885, [2015] Pens LR 489
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Williams v The Trustees of Swansea University Pension and Assurance Scheme and Another SC 17-Dec-2018
The appellant complained of disability discrimination. He retired early suffering Tourette’s syndrome. He had worked part time, and the parties now disputed his pension entitlements.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.550675