Social care charity not guilty of race discrimination
Mr Egene was of black-African origin and had come to the UK from Nigeria in September 2009...
...on a one-year study programme. He had permission from the immigration authorities to stay until October 2007 and accept paid work for 20 hours a week. He applied for a job with Creative Support Ltd (a provider of social services for people with learning difficulties, mental health and other needs), in December 2006. The charity (an industrial and provident society with charitable status) has resettled people from long stay hospitals into supported housing services. It also states ‘we developed services to work positively with female and black and minority ethnic service users, including a service for Asian women in Bolton and a range of supported housing for African Caribbean men and women in Manchester’.
He was interviewed and told he was the preferred candidate for the post on the strength of which he told his prospective employers he was going to move from Bolton to Manchester as he did not have his own transport, despite there being no indication from them that relocation was a condition of the offer. He was offered the role of part-time support worker on a residential programme for black African men with mental health problems. This was subject to various conditions, such as the receipt of references, CRB checks, confirmation of the right to work in the UK etc. All the documentation provided was found to be satisfactory. However, the offer letter had also stated that before final confirmation could be made with a start date, Creative Support’s senior personnel had to endorse the recommendation of the panel that had made the offer.
This final interview took place on 27 February 2007. A lack of communication between the original panel and the senior staff resulted in a mistaken assumption that Mr Egene was being recruited for a full-time post that he intended to pursue a full time course of study and return to Nigeria in September 2007. They wrote to him on 2 March withdrawing the offer of employment. The reasons were confused and based on the misinformation arising from the unstructured second formal interview and lack of notes. He took them to the employment tribunal in May 2007 and although he had not specifically complained of racial discrimination, the tribunal ruled that it had taken place. The charity appealed to the EAT on grounds the tribunal had acted outside the limits of its jurisdiction and the appeal was allowed. The judge’s view was that the ‘mistaken belief as the Claimant’s intentions, which led to the withdrawal of the job offer, was found expressly not to amount to less favourable treatment on grounds of race’.
www.employmentappeals.gov.uk/Public/Upload/08_0025wwLBDA.doc
Author: Clarissa Dann
Clarissa Dann was the editor of Caritas as well as an HR and management online service,he People Bulletin until July 2011.
She is now the editor of the specialist trade finance magazine, Trade and Forfaiting Review which can be viewed at www.tfreview.com but does write on charity finance and investment from time to time.
Clarissa has a background in legal and professional publishing, as well as business journalism and holds an MBA from
There are no comments on this article. Be the first to comment.