EMP6
Harassment
à Under s40 of the Equality Act 2010, an employer must not harass:
o Employees or
o Job Applicants
Eligibility à Time Limit = 3 months LESS A DAY from the act of discrimination (s123(1)).
(1)
Burden of Proof à Reversed for harassment and victimisation claims.
à Employer must prove that his or her conduct was NOT unlawful (s136).
(2)
Has there been à Defined by s26 Equality Act 2010.
Harassment? à s26: A harasses B if:
o s26(1): A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected
(3) characteristic OR
o s26(2): A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature OR
o (s26(3): A or another person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual
nature or that is related to gender reassignment or sex and because of B's
rejection of or submission to the conduct, A treats B less favourably than
A would treat B if B had not rejected or submitted to the conduct.
o AND
o The conduct has the purpose or effect of
Violating B’s dignity or (s26(1)(b)(i)) OR
Creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or
offensive environment for B (s26(1)(b)(ii)
Character Related à “Unwanted conduct” must be “related to a relevant protected characteristic”:
Harassment o Gender reassignment (s 7)
o Race (s 9)
s26(1) o Religion or belief (s 10)
o Sex (s 11)
(3a) o Sexual orientation (s 12).
o NOT marriage and civil partnership / pregnancy and maternity (pregnancy
is covered by sexual harassment).
à Note “related to” does not mean that the complainant has to compare to
someone who does not share that protected characteristic. The question is merely
whether the conduct is “related to” the protected characteristic.
à So, in WS 6, Prep Task: when the female Claimant was asked out by her male
colleague who, when refused, said “Getting choosy are you? You are so ugly I
thought you took whatever you could get”, this could be “related” to the relevant
characteristic of sex. The Claimant has been asked out because she is a woman
and her colleague is a heterosexual man, thus the unwanted conduct is related to
Harassment
à Under s40 of the Equality Act 2010, an employer must not harass:
o Employees or
o Job Applicants
Eligibility à Time Limit = 3 months LESS A DAY from the act of discrimination (s123(1)).
(1)
Burden of Proof à Reversed for harassment and victimisation claims.
à Employer must prove that his or her conduct was NOT unlawful (s136).
(2)
Has there been à Defined by s26 Equality Act 2010.
Harassment? à s26: A harasses B if:
o s26(1): A engages in unwanted conduct related to a relevant protected
(3) characteristic OR
o s26(2): A engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature OR
o (s26(3): A or another person engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual
nature or that is related to gender reassignment or sex and because of B's
rejection of or submission to the conduct, A treats B less favourably than
A would treat B if B had not rejected or submitted to the conduct.
o AND
o The conduct has the purpose or effect of
Violating B’s dignity or (s26(1)(b)(i)) OR
Creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or
offensive environment for B (s26(1)(b)(ii)
Character Related à “Unwanted conduct” must be “related to a relevant protected characteristic”:
Harassment o Gender reassignment (s 7)
o Race (s 9)
s26(1) o Religion or belief (s 10)
o Sex (s 11)
(3a) o Sexual orientation (s 12).
o NOT marriage and civil partnership / pregnancy and maternity (pregnancy
is covered by sexual harassment).
à Note “related to” does not mean that the complainant has to compare to
someone who does not share that protected characteristic. The question is merely
whether the conduct is “related to” the protected characteristic.
à So, in WS 6, Prep Task: when the female Claimant was asked out by her male
colleague who, when refused, said “Getting choosy are you? You are so ugly I
thought you took whatever you could get”, this could be “related” to the relevant
characteristic of sex. The Claimant has been asked out because she is a woman
and her colleague is a heterosexual man, thus the unwanted conduct is related to
