could lead to complaints of harassment related to gender reassignment or sexual orientation. It is important for employers to update their disciplinary policies, preferably in consultation with employees, to define in the clearest possible terms the constraints that may have to be placed on freedom of expression. It is also essential to back up the policy by providing training for managers and other employees. There is now a good deal of case law that can be used as part of the training to illustrate both good and bad practice. If, despite the policy and the training, an employee complains about views expressed by another employee, that is a situation in which workplace mediation may be particularly helpful, given the risk that either taking action on the complaint or taking no action could lead to tribunal proceedings. What are your main recommended topics for talks to legal practitioners and their clients and for training seminars? A key topic for senior managers, HR professionals, and legal advisers is equal pay. We have seen, most recently from the supermarket cases, how a few claims can open the floodgates to further claims. It is possible, in the course of one talk or seminar, to cover the entire range of employment practices that could give rise to equal pay claims, and potential defences to claims, such as market forces. A very specific issue that should be discussed in a session for senior managers, legal advisers, and HR professionals is job evaluation. In what circumstances is an organisation most at risk of equal value claims? Where there is no current grading system based on a job evaluation study (JES), could adopting a JES help protect against equal value claims? What are the potential disadvantages? Where there is an existing JES, what could make it vulnerable to a challenge? I delivered a judgment some years ago that rejected a challenge to a major scheme. I am also familiar with cases in which challenges were successful. A further key topic is religion and belief discrimination, for the reasons already discussed. What advice would you give to organisations looking to foster a more equitable workplace and mitigate equal pay and other discrimination claims? First, stating the obvious, employers and managers need to understand and comply with the many obligations Parliament has placed on them. Secondly, they need to understand their organisation’s existing pay and other employment practices and arrangements. I have already mentioned 20 LAWYER MONTHLY DECEMBER 2024 that an organisation’s headline gender pay gap figure does not give any useful information to outsiders. However, the detailed information compiled as part of the exercise can give a great deal of useful information to the organisation’s own managers. It is also important that the organisation’s records include detailed information about previous internal decisions relating to matters such as pay, recruitment, and promotion. Equal pay cases have been lost because managers simply did not know the reason for a difference in pay that had existed for some years. Thirdly, employers need to be open to changes in employment practices and ready to extract advantages from them. Thirty years ago, it was lawful for employers to discriminate against disabled workers. Now, employers know that a very wide range of disabilities can be accommodated by making appropriate adjustments. Similarly, they see the mutual advantages of familyfriendly employment policies. Fourthly, equal opportunity policies must be supported by providing appropriate training. Employers need to be aware that good intentions and a desire to treat staff fairly cut no ice when facing indirect discrimination pay claims. They can be hit with compelling claims without having knowingly done anything wrong.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk3Mzkz