The People Bulletin

In the case of Crilly V Ballymagroarty Hazelbank Community Partnership, Mrs Crilly, who applied for a vacancy at the charity, successfully claimed indirect discrimination against the organisation on the basis that their shortlisting criteria for candidates had a disproportionate adverse impact on women.

Background

Following a six-year break from paid employment due to childcare responsibilities Mrs Crilly applied for a six-month fixed-term post of neighbourhood regeneration officer with the charity.  As part of the shortlisting criteria the employers required candidates to have a “third level qualification in a relevant discipline with two years’ relevant experience in a community development capacity (paid) gained within the last five years”.

Despite having “continuing, extensive, high-level involvement in the voluntary sector in the area of community development and neighbourhood regeneration”, Mrs Crilly was not shortlisted for the post as she failed to meet to the required levels of paid experience in the past five years.

Mrs Crilly claimed indirect discrimination on the grounds of her sex.

At the tribunal

At the tribunal the charity argued that the shortlisting criteria were selected on the basis that they needed to have someone in the role who could: 

• perform the job with minimal supervision; and
• do the job without the need for extensive training.

However, the tribunal were not satisfied the shortlisting criteria tallied up with the employer’s aims. The argument that they needed someone who did not need extensive training was undermined by the fact that the shortlisting criteria allowed for a candidate who had no experience in the past three years to be shortlisted for the role. Further to this the employer offered a two-month induction period which would have allowed for the candidate to receive full training on new policies and procedures.

When coming to their decision the tribunal referred the Northern Ireland Labour Force survey, which indicated that a much larger percentage of women (90.6%) than men spend time out of the workplace in order to meet childcare needs. This data backed up Mrs Crilly’s assertion that women were placed at a particular disadvantage by the five-year selection criteria.

Furthermore, the tribunal found that as Mrs Crilly’s paid experience was before the stated five-year time frame she would have been excluded at the shortlisting stage and therefore not given the opportunity to discuss her experience in a voluntary capacity.

The tribunal estimated that, if she had been shortlisted, Mrs Crilly would have had a 50% chance of being recruited. She was awarded £14,677, which included £5,000 for injury to feelings.

www.xperthr.co.uk