Flashbangandgone Sun 15-May-16 20:25:22
Even if it could be demonstrated there was some discrimination here, it doesn't follow that suing is appropriate.... It's utterly disproportionate!
That is for a judge to decide, though the suit could also be settled out of court, possibly for less money, with the pool agreeing to better education of its managers and staff.
£20,000 is chicken feed as far as discrimination suits go.
And it's not the first time a pool has discriminated against a breastfeeding mother:
"Sophie Howes, the mother, said: 'I decided to take a stance as I believe no woman should be made to feel embarrassed by wanting to breastfeed their child in public.
'It's important that when this kind of thing happens we challenge the practices and policies of services providers to ensure it doesn't happen again to others."
This is why the monetary value of £20,000 is important. It's not so she can get a boob job.
"Lucy Angus, from Unity Law, represented Ms Howes and said many women aren't aware of their rights.
She said: 'This case is important as it gives breastfeeding mums the confidence to know they can challenge discriminatory treatment of this kind.
'Many breastfeeding mums aren't aware of their rights in the same way service providers, such as leisure centres, aren't aware of their legal obligations.
This case helps to raise awareness of the issue from both perspectives.''
Oh look, there was even a pool manager claiming there was some sort of health and safety issue at stake too...
"Emma Wood, chief executive of Ashford Leisure Trust, said: 'Ashford Leisure Trust fully supports breastfeeding at all its sites and understands the legal rights of mothers to do this.
'On this occasion it was believed there was a legitimate health and safety risk - ie, feeding actually taking place while both the mother and baby were in the water, and a suitable alternative area just a couple of metres away was suggested.
'We do of course apologise for any upset caused. The staff were concerned for the health and welfare of the baby.
'It may be that this concern was misplaced due to a misunderstanding of the situation but it was not intended to discriminate against the mother.
'It is clear that additional training is required and this is being arranged with Public Health for all staff to ensure there is an enhanced awareness and understanding of breastfeeding.
We will also be working with experts and professionals to ensure that a suitable policy is produced."
"The Equality Act 2010 is a piece of litigation that protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society.
Under the Act it is against the law to discriminate against people who are pregnant or who have a child.
People are protected when using a public service - such as a swimming pool in this case
According to the Act discrimination includes the following:
Direct discrimination - treating someone with a protected characteristic less favourably than others.
Indirect discrimination - putting rules or arrangements in place that apply to everyone, but that put someone with a protected characteristic at an unfair disadvantage.
Harassment - unwanted behaviour linked to a protected characteristic that violates someone’s dignity or creates an offensive environment for them.
Victimisation - treating someone unfairly because they’ve complained about discrimination or harassment"
....You can all put that in your pipes and smoke it.
Public service means the actual pool, where the water is.