header-logo header-logo

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

Dispute procedures victimise employees

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 claims more likely to centre on bullying and harassment, and

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll