This month's summary includes a look at the pools used for comparison in discrimination cases, considering all the options before dismissing for redundancy, taking a look at the special circumstances where someone might be employed by two organisations and what caused a director to be disqualified for 9 years.

• Indirect Discrimination: What constitutes too narrow a pool for comparison?
• Unfair Dismissal: It was unfair to dismiss for redundancy instead of considering furlough during the coronavirus pandemic
• Unfair Dismissal: A union official was not also an employee of the union for unfair dismissal purposes
• Directors: Disqualification order for director who failed to protect funds and keep proper accounting records

Indirect Discrimination: What constitutes too narrow a pool for comparison?

In Boohene and others v Royal Parks Ltd [2023] EAT 69, the claimants were contract workers employed by a third party to work on its toilet and cleaning services contract with the respondent in London. Their minimum rates of pay were set below London Living Wage ("LLW"); this contrasted with the respondent's direct employees, who were office-based and had a level of pay higher than LLW. The employment tribunal found that the respondent had committed to ensuring that the minimum pay of its direct employees would not fall below LLW but had decided not to accept the option of LLW as the minimum pay rate on the toilet and cleaning contract.

The claimants brought claims of indirect race...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiZmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lm1vbmRhcS5jb20vdWsv...