header-logo header-logo

11 March 2010 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Opinion , Tribunals , Employment
printer mail-detail

When the gloves are off

Earlier this year Watford employment tribunal awarded Elon de Oliveira £35,700 after a sustained period of racist abuse he suffered at work as a hospital porter at Hammersmith Hospital...

Jon Robins reveals some hard truths about employment tribunal anomalies

Earlier this year Watford employment tribunal awarded Elon de Oliveira £35,700 after a sustained period of racist abuse he suffered at work as a hospital porter at Hammersmith Hospital.

Elon was harassed on an almost daily basis over two years by his manager and supervisor, a particularly unpleasant father and son team. Taunts included: “F*** off back to Brazil, you Brazilian c**t”, and “All Brazilians have sex changes, when are you getting yours?” It wasn’t just verbal insults, Elon was also pushed around and his pay stopped.

As a result of a quirk in our legal system, employment cases are deemed “non-contentious” despite the self-evident truth that disputes between workers and bosses can be as bitterly fought as any other kind. This anomaly allows for the use of contingency fees

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll