In Eversheds Legal Services Ltd v De Belin, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (“EAT”) upheld the employment tribunal’s decision that effectively inflating the score of a female employee on maternity leave in a redundancy selection process constituted unlawful sex discrimination against the other, male, colleague in the relevant selection pool. In this DechertOnPoint, we report on this recent decision which illustrates that giving the benefit of the doubt to the employee on maternity leave is not always the safest option.
Mr De Belin was employed as a property lawyer by Eversheds. He was placed in a pool for redundancy with his female colleague, Ms Reinholz. They were the only two employees in the pool and were assessed against five selection criteria. One of the criteria was a measure of financial performance called “lock-up”, which assessed the length of time between carrying out work and being paid for the work. This was assessed over the preceding 12-month period, during which time Ms Reinholz had been on maternity leave.
Mr De Belin scored 0.5, the lowest possible score out of a maximum score of 2. Ms Reinholz was awarded a notional score of 2, the highest possible score, on the basis that she had not been at work for some of the period under review and did not have the opportunity to influence the score. This meant that, overall, Ms Reinholz scored 27.5 and Mr De Belin scored 27.
Please see full article below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.