Firms must guard against flimsy discrimination claims
The case of a middle-aged man who’s thought to have made thousands of pounds from numerous discrimination claims highlights the problems faced by small firms struggling to cope with employment law.
The man used the Ministry of Justice website to lodge claims against employers who used words like “school leaver” and “recent graduate” in their recruitment advertising. He then contacted the firms concerned telling them they could avoid the trouble of going to a tribunal if they settled with him quickly. This was in spite of the fact that he hadn’t even applied for many of the jobs.
Unfortunately, many firms will cave in and settle when faced with claims because, according to a recent CBI survey, they believe the tribunal system is ineffective and skewed against them.
They prefer to settle cases even though they have a strong chance of winning because they fear the cost of going to tribunals.
It’s easy to see a firm’s dilemma, but if everyone simply gives in then it encourages more people to proceed with weak cases and the problem snowballs.
It can be cheaper in the long run for firms to stand their ground.
That would certainly be true in the case of this claimant because in reality he had very little chance of success. It is wrong, of course, for firms to put age related conditions in recruitment ads, but that alone is not enough to bring a claim.
The claimant would have to show that he had actually been discriminated against. He would be unlikely to do so in these cases which is why most of them were struck out by the Tribunal Service for being misconceived and vexatious.
Contrary to what many firms believe, tribunals don’t always find in favour of the claimant and award enormous sums in compensation.
Firms will have to consider each claim on its individual merits, of course, but they should not feel pressurised into settling because they fear it is too expensive to mount a defence or because they fear the tribunal service will automatically find against them.
Please contact us if you would like more information.
July 2010
The views expressed in this article are those of the article contributors, for which Judge & Priestley LLP accepts no responsibility. Readers should take appropriate legal advice before acting on any issues raised
