This Northern Ireland industrial tribunal decision is a good example of how an employer can indirectly discriminate against a female job applicant by making it a requirement to have a number of years' relevant experience within a narrow time frame, something that is more difficult for women who have been raising a family to achieve.
A model question on an application form asking an individual if he or she requires any reasonable adjustments to be made in the shortlisting process due to disability.
In The South Yorkshire Pensions Authority v Burns EAT/0004/05, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment tribunal misdirected itself in inferring disability discrimination where the employer, after shortlisting, had the opportunity to clarify any omissions or deficiencies on a disabled applicant's application form and add him to the shortlist.
In Meer v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (26.5.88) EOR21G, the Court of Appeal rules that it is bound by its previous decision in Perera v Civil Service Commission to hold that a selection criterion can only be a "requirement or condition" within the meaning of s.1(1)(b) of the Race Relations Act 1976 (RRA) if it is a "must".
In London Borough of Barking & Dagenham v Camara (11.7.88) EOR21I, the EAT holds that it is an error of law for an industrial tribunal to regard the burden of disproving direct discrimination as being on the employer once the applicant has shown less favourable treatment in circumstances which are consistent with that treatment being on racial grounds.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to shortlisting job candidates.