0370 270 6000

Can cost ever justify discrimination?

2 June 2011

A ‘provision, criterion or practice’ which puts one protected group (eg persons of a particular race, religion, sexual orientation, age etc) at a disadvantage amounts to indirect discrimination unless it can be justified as a ‘proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.’

Cost is often a major factor, but until recently, the view from tribunals was that cost alone is not enough. Some recent cases have called this stance into question, the latest being Cherfi v G4S Security Services Ltd.

Mr Cherfi, a Muslim, regularly left his employers site on Friday lunchtimes to attend mosque. Mr Cherfi was told by his employer that he could no longer do this as G4S were contractually obliged to ensure that a specified number of security guards were present throughout operating hours.

Although in this case the EAT decided that G4S had not relied on cost alone to justify its practices, the EAT did suggest that had it done so, cost by itself might constitute sufficient justification.

Related opinions

New guidance on best practice around reasonable adjustments

The new guidance is impressive; it’s well written and the examples of solutions and workarounds being used in law firms are invaluable, as it shows disabled people what is possible and practical.

View blog

Government plans to ratify convention on ending violence and harassment in the workplace

Ratifying C190 would mean additional obligations for employers to prevent & address harassment & violence in the world of work.

View blog

Taxi driver’s rental and uniform costs deductible for NMW purposes

Augustine v Data Cars Ltd the Employment Appeal Tribunal highlights importance of ensuring pay for National Minimum Wage purposes is carefully calculated.

View blog

Fire and rehire

The new Acas guidance is a timely reminder for employers on how to approach effecting contractual changes.

View blog

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up