header-logo header-logo

Dispute procedures victimise employees

13 April 2007
Issue: 7268 / Categories: Legal News , Discrimination , Human rights , Employment
printer mail-detail

Workplace dispute resolution procedures designed to protect sufferers of religious and sexual orientation-related abuse tend to victimise them even further, and usually result in their dismissal or demotion, research shows.

Surveys undertaken by the Institute for Employment Studies (IES) and ACAS, published last week, show that dispute resolution procedures often aggravate the experience of discrimination rather than resolve it.

The IES research found that a major complaint among claimants was the tendency of employers to respond to their complaint by seeing them as the problem, rather than the victim of unfair treatment.

The research tracked the progress of the employment equality regulations on sexual orientation and religion or belief, which became law in 2003.

Participants in the ACAS study, which covered 470 sexual orientation and 461 religion or belief cases, said employment tribunals were a valuable way for their claims of ill treatment to receive an objective hearing. This was felt to be more important than obtaining compensation.

The research also found that different groups faced different kinds of discrimination, with sexual orientation

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll