Discrimination is no joke.
| Author | Nickson, Sue |
| Position | Employers must prevent abuse by a third party - Brief Article |
Most employers understand their obligations to prevent discriminatory acts by employees, but they may be less aware that they have a duty to prevent abuse of staff by third parties, warns Sue Nickson
According to s.3.2 Race Relations Act 1976, an employer is liable for discriminatory acts by its employees and agents unless it has taken all reasonable steps in advance to prevent that sort of conduct. Similar provisions exist in sex and disability legislation. But does an employer also have a duty to take steps to protect employees from actions or comments made by unconnected third parties?
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decision in the case of Burton and Rhule v De Vere Hotels in 1996 received considerable media attention because Bernard Manning was involved. Two black waitresses claimed that they had been racially discriminated against by their employer when the hotel management failed to take steps to stop them being exposed to racist abuse by Manning and members of his audience at a function in the hotel. The issue was whether the employer could be liable for the abuse under the Race Relations Act, even though neither Manning nor his audience were hotel agents or employees.
It was held that the hotel had racially discriminated. The fact that the employer was not racially motivated was unimportant. The crucial factor was that the abuse took place at an event controlled by the hotel, which could have prevented the harassment (or at least reduced it) by, for example, withdrawing the waitresses. This established the principle that an employer has a duty, where reasonably practicable, to protect employees from being harassed by any third party, whether a comedian, customer or member of the public.
This principle was recently put to the test in the case of Bennett v Essex County Council [2000] IDS Brief 666. Mrs Bennett was the only black teacher at Fryern School, where she worked from January 1995. The school had a number of pupils with behavioural problems and, in the first four months of her employment, they subjected Bennett to a number of incidents of racial abuse.
The incidents were reported to the head of humanities who prepared letters to send to parents of five pupils. The headmaster, however, decided that the letters should not be sent as the school had...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
