EAT Sex Discrimination – Victimisation
A schoolteacher appealed from dismissal of her claims for sex (pregnancy) discrimination against school and her head teacher, in expressing anger at her being pregnant and its consequences for the school, and in allocating her to teach a different class on return from that she had taught before taking maternity leave. Her appeal was allowed where the Tribunal had applied the wrong test to determine ‘detriment’ by failing to consider that loss of a chance of influencing the choice of class to be taught, through a discussion process open to all other non-pregnant employees, was indeed a detriment, but otherwise rejected.
The judgment is the first appellate decison to consider what ‘the same job’ means in the context of maternity leave.
Citations:
[2007] UKEAT 0329 – 06 – 1005, [2007] IRLR 652, [2007] ICR 1451
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Dr Anya v University of Oxford and Another CA 22-Mar-2001
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant
When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.251803