MoD to compensate female soldier for discrimination

[BetsyBoop]

HERE

Not sure what I think about this one

My (unanswered) questions are

If she was offered an alternative job, (which would have presumably been one with more regular hours & therefore making childcare easier to arrange) what were her reasons for not taking it?

What is the child's father doing to help raise & support her?

Unequal treatment because she was unable to have a family member live in to help her with childcare, although the right existed, its just that the person she wanted was barred on immigration grounds. Nothing to do with failure to attend duty etc

Then surely, she needs to be taking the Home Office to court re: immigration laws, not the MoD as they have no influence over immigration as the tribunal should damn well know. Pathetic ruling.

Here's the Telegraph article (thanks tablefor3)

IMVHO, reading between the lines of what the panel chairman said & the fact that she only got £17k when she'd claimed £1m () it was basically a case they had to award on a technical point, but they didn't actually think much of her claim.

"interview without coffee" haven't heard that phrase in a looong time scary (not that I ever personally had one of course )

Oh & I expect that now she has come into all that "capital" they will stop payment of her income support etc. Not quite the "golden egg" she was expecting I bet.

Cynical? Moi?

I know for a fact that if she had agreed to move to Blandford, she would have had flexible childcare in place.

Her Brigadier phoned me at the time to arrange it.

She obviously didn't want to stay in then if she didn't take the Blandford posting. I have no sympathy for her at all, and I think 0.17p would have been more appropriate.

This case makes me sick - of course shes in it to screw whatever she can get out of this and I hope she gets bugger all.

Oh just realised she didnt get the million - hadn't read the updates on this .

I am sickened that she was not laughed out of court, you can see she is trying it on and sadly in todays mad world she is getting away with it.

What a bargain that was! The girl was well-known in the Corp as an oxygen thief. Saves the army paying her £28k per year for sweet fa.

LMAO at her being 'head-hunted'.

Sadly weepootle she is not the only one.....

Just to help those out struggling to understand the ruling...

A disclaimer first, I don't necessarily agree with it, but for all those saying "but it would have been the same for a man...." there is a rule called indirect discrimination. It means applying a rule (you have to be available 24/7) that applies equally to men and women, but has a disproprortionate effect on one group (women). Since women statistically are far more often primary carers, tribunals see any rule which makes childcare more difficult as potentially discriminatory. They then look at whether there is a good reason for the rule.

It's indirect discrimination that lets women make cases about full time requirements, about being treated worse because they can't go out drinking after work ,etc. It's quite an important rule.

The reason that the immigration thing came up was the tribunal basically said "you're all one entity - the government." The MoD did try and argue that they didn't have control over immigration.

Up to that point, I'm kind of with the tribunal. Where they lose me is in saying it's reasonable to expect immigration rules to be changed to help with someone's childcare.

I understand the ruling, but am not with the tribunal at all.

It is made perfectly clear what the terms and conditions are when you join up. If you cannot satisfy that, then don't join.

HM Forces are NOT a civilian company, and operate under different circumstances. When the European working time directive, trade unions, guaranteed annual leave etc are applied to HM Forces, then the Tribunal can start having a view. Until then, they can butt out.

Actually, I've just had a look. According to the Times report, the whole award was for injury to feelings. They gave nothing for lost earnings.

That type of award is basically the tribunal sayings "We found for you on a technicality, but we don't want to give you money" (as Betsy said). They pretty much have to give injury to feelings if they find discrimination, and it's a bit like a grid - how mean were they, then you get X. They make no allowances for the type of workplace: army or trading floor the same as a nursery school or charity in how you can expect to be spoken to, so unsurprisingly robust army language went down for a medium level award.

agree, she was in no way shape or form suited for a military career, FFS. silly case, they should never have selected her