Cases3311590/2023

Claimant v The Whittington Health NHS Trust

6 June 2025Before Employment Judge C LewisLondon Central

Outcome

Claimant succeeds£22,165

Individual claims

Indirect Discrimination(sex)succeeded

The tribunal found that averaging the claimant's interview score for the post of Islington Operational Lead and not offering her the post as a result constituted indirect sex discrimination. The provision, criterion or practice of averaging interview scores put women (who are more likely to work part-time) at a particular disadvantage compared to men, and the respondent could not objectively justify this practice.

Othersucceeded

The tribunal found that averaging the claimant's interview score for the post of Islington Operational Lead and not offering her the post constituted less favourable treatment because of her status as a part-time worker, contrary to the Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000. The treatment was unjustified and directly related to her part-time status.

Facts

The claimant, a part-time employee of the NHS Trust, applied for the post of Islington Operational Lead. During the selection process, the respondent averaged her interview score with other assessment scores. This averaging method disadvantaged her and resulted in her not being offered the post. The tribunal heard evidence over three days in June 2025.

Decision

The tribunal unanimously found that the averaging of the claimant's interview score constituted both indirect sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 and less favourable treatment under the Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000. The respondent failed to objectively justify the practice. The claimant was awarded £19,000 for injury to feelings plus interest of £3,165.

Practical note

Employers must ensure that recruitment scoring methodologies do not indirectly disadvantage part-time workers or protected groups, and any potentially discriminatory practice must be objectively justified.

Award breakdown

Injury to feelings£19,000
Interest£3,165

Vento band: middle

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

EqA 2010 s.19Part-Time Workers Regulations 2000

Case details

Case number
3311590/2023
Decision date
6 June 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister