LONDON: Three experienced white British police officers have won a discrimination case after an employment judge ruled that they were passed over for promotion in favour of a British Punjabi police officer because of their race.
Detective inspector Phillip Turner-Robson, inspector Graham Horton and custody inspector Kirsteen Bishop claimed at an employment tribunal that Thames Valley Police (TVP) directly discriminated against them because of their British white ethnicity in a bid to boost diversity of its senior staff.The tribunal heard that police sergeant Sidhu was moved into a detective inspector role at Aylesbury without the job being advertised after deputy chief constable Hogg made it clear to superintendent Emma Baillie that he wanted her to “make it happen”. The sergeant had not even been promoted to inspector at the time she was made detective inspector, the tribunal heard.
On August 19, 2022 an internal form was submitted asking for a job advert for a detective inspector in the priority crime team to be put out. The same day Turner-Robson expressed an interest in the vacancy.
On around September 8, 2022, Baillie decided to move Sidhu into the detective inspector role without undertaking any competitive process. Sidhu got a pay increase and added pension benefits.
Baillie then “tried to retrospectively justify it by saying lateral moves were part of the BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) progression programme which clearly did not exist at the time,” employment judge Robin Postle said.
On September 27, 2022 Turner-Robson enquired as to when the advert would be published and was told there would be no advert as someone had been posted in the role as part of an “Asian minority ethnic positive action progression programme”.
TVP argued that the appointment was a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim of encouraging persons from minority ethnic backgrounds to reach senior ranks.”
But the tribunal concluded that Baillie’s decision “clearly constituted positive discrimination”. It ruled that the decision disadvantaged those officers who did not share PC Sidhu’s protected characteristic of race as they were denied the opportunity for the role which they had expressed interest in, that it “went beyond mere encouragement” and was “not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”. “The unanimous judgment of the tribunal is that the claimant’s claims that they were directly discriminated by reason of the protected characteristic of race are well founded,” judge Postle said.
Detective inspector Phillip Turner-Robson, inspector Graham Horton and custody inspector Kirsteen Bishop claimed at an employment tribunal that Thames Valley Police (TVP) directly discriminated against them because of their British white ethnicity in a bid to boost diversity of its senior staff.The tribunal heard that police sergeant Sidhu was moved into a detective inspector role at Aylesbury without the job being advertised after deputy chief constable Hogg made it clear to superintendent Emma Baillie that he wanted her to “make it happen”. The sergeant had not even been promoted to inspector at the time she was made detective inspector, the tribunal heard.
On August 19, 2022 an internal form was submitted asking for a job advert for a detective inspector in the priority crime team to be put out. The same day Turner-Robson expressed an interest in the vacancy.
On around September 8, 2022, Baillie decided to move Sidhu into the detective inspector role without undertaking any competitive process. Sidhu got a pay increase and added pension benefits.
Baillie then “tried to retrospectively justify it by saying lateral moves were part of the BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) progression programme which clearly did not exist at the time,” employment judge Robin Postle said.
On September 27, 2022 Turner-Robson enquired as to when the advert would be published and was told there would be no advert as someone had been posted in the role as part of an “Asian minority ethnic positive action progression programme”.
TVP argued that the appointment was a “proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim of encouraging persons from minority ethnic backgrounds to reach senior ranks.”
But the tribunal concluded that Baillie’s decision “clearly constituted positive discrimination”. It ruled that the decision disadvantaged those officers who did not share PC Sidhu’s protected characteristic of race as they were denied the opportunity for the role which they had expressed interest in, that it “went beyond mere encouragement” and was “not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim”. “The unanimous judgment of the tribunal is that the claimant’s claims that they were directly discriminated by reason of the protected characteristic of race are well founded,” judge Postle said.