header-logo header-logo

On the beat: positive action in practice

20 June 2019 / Paul McFarlane
Issue: 7845 / Categories: Features , Employment , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

The first employment tribunal ruling on positive action poses problems for employers, says Paul McFarlane

  • Interpreting positive action provisions.
  • Who is best placed to decide who is, and who is not, qualified to perform a role?

In the first decided case on the use of positive action provisions under s 159 Equality Act 2010, an employment tribunal has unanimously found that a police force’s recruitment process directly discriminated against a white, heterosexual, male applicant.

The claimant Mr Furlong, a white heterosexual male without a disability, applied for a position as a Police Constable in the 2017–18 recruitment process with the respondent, Cheshire Constabulary.

The recruitment process comprised three stages; an application form to check candidate eligibility; a ‘sift’ stage comprising a competency interview and various written and interactive exercises; and, finally, an interview stage for all candidates who had successfully passed the ‘sift’. In 2017–18, a large cohort of 127 candidates progressed to interview. At this final stage, the respondent applied ‘positive action’ appointing first any candidates

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll