In a significant victory for workplace equality, two employees, Natalie James and Joanna Saine, were awarded £95,000 in compensation following a race discrimination case against the London and Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q). The Employment Tribunal ruled that the pair had been overlooked for promotions due to biased decision-making, marking an important step towards fair recruitment practices.
Tribunal finds evidence of bias
The case arose after L&Q advertised three internal vacancies, attracting six applicants three black and three white. During the recruitment process, candidates were scored on their interview responses, with two white British applicants scoring the highest (15 and 13) and filling two of the three available positions. The remaining candidates, including James and Saine, who are of black British Caribbean heritage, scored 11.5, 9, and 12. The lowest-scoring candidate, who scored 7, was also white. Despite the internal candidates’ qualifications, the third position remained unfilled, and the company chose to re-advertise externally.
A grievance meeting revealed that Ms. Francesca Purbrick, Director of Homeownership, decided not to appoint an internal candidate to the final vacancy due to a lack of complete confidence in the applicants. She explained, "Not that they are not appointable… [I] didn’t feel 100% comfortable that I was sure of people and confident they can do it." She added, "I am quite picky… Unless I am 100% certain that a person will do the job I won’t appoint." The tribunal later ruled that this subjective approach to hiring decisions allowed unconscious bias to influence the outcome, leading to a finding of race discrimination. James and Saine were awarded compensation of £64,058.67 and £30,875.63, respectively.
EHRC's support proves pivotal
The case was notably supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which provided financial backing for the legal proceedings. Baroness Kishwer Falkner, Chairwoman of the EHRC, emphasised that employers must conduct fair interview processes to ensure equality in the workplace and prevent discriminatory practices.
The Commission’s involvement was not just financial; it underscored the need for strong support systems for individuals experiencing discrimination and lent credibility to James and Saine's claims. The case has prompted other potential victims to consider coming forward, raising awareness about the prevalence of bias in recruitment processes.
Legal implications and employer responsibilities
The tribunal’s decision was based on the Equality Act, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race. Employers are required to ensure recruitment and promotion processes are free from bias, and decisions must be made on merit alone.
To avoid similar issues, companies are encouraged to adopt clear, objective criteria for evaluating candidates and provide training on unconscious bias for hiring managers. Regular monitoring of recruitment processes and engaging with external bodies such as the EHRC can help organisations maintain fair hiring standards.
This article was generated using Lex HR, an AI tool designed to assist HR professionals with employment law. If you find the content helpful, please explore Lex HR and sign up for a free trial to see how it can benefit your HR practices.
