New rosters for underground train drivers were indirectly discriminatory because all the men could comply with them but not all the women could do so: it was a ‘striking fact’ that not a single man was disadvantaged despite the overwhelming preponderance of men in the pool of train drivers affected.
Judges:
Simon Brown, Swinton Thomas, Potter LJJ
Citations:
[1998] EWCA Civ 877, [1999] ICR 494
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At EAT – London Underground Ltd v Edwards EAT 14-Feb-1995
The Tribunal considered the difficulties arising where one party was not represented, but where the case gave rise to difficult questions of law. In this case the claimant alleged sex discrimination in the context of rostering arrangements making . .
At EAT – London Underground Ltd v Edwards EAT 13-Jan-1997
. .
Cited by:
Approved – The Chief Constable of the Bedfordshire Constabulary v M Graham EAT 26-Sep-2001
The claimant was given a senior post in the force, but within the same division in which her policeman husband held a more senior post. The appointment was rescinded, and she claimed sex discrimination. She was found to have been indirectly . .
See Also – London Underground Limited v Edwards CA 21-May-1998
A new driver roster imposing shift working timetables discriminated against women since significantly less in proportion of women could meet the new arrangements – indirect discrimination . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Rutherford and others HL 3-May-2006
The claimant sought to establish that as a male employee, he had suffered sex discrimination in that he lost rights to redundancy pay after the age of retirement where a woman might not.
Held: The appeal was dismised. There were very few . .
Cited – Homer v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 25-Apr-2012
The appellant had failed in his claim for indirect age discrimination. Approaching retirement, he complained that new conditions allowing advancement to graduates only, discriminated against him since he could not complete a degree before retiring. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144356