An employment judge has told global firm Clyde & Co to ‘learn some important lessons’ about its recruitment processes, despite dismissing claims of racial discrimination.
Anne Epelle, a Nigerian woman, brought claims for discrimination and victimisation against the firm after failing with three different applications for training contracts.
Following a three-day hearing in October, Employment Judge Snelson and two other panel members found all the claims were either not well-founded or were out of time. They added that the evidence put forward by Epelle was not sufficient to establish a case and the firm had provided rational explanations for rejecting her applications.
But in a postscript to the judgment, the judge outlined several ways in which the firm could have done better, saying that ‘[Clyde & Co’s] protestations about their "passionate" commitment to inclusion and diversity do not at all times site comfortably with our findings concerning their management of the claimant’s applications’.
Epelle submitted that her race was ‘at least a material factor’ in the decisions to reject her. She claimed for indirect discrimination on the basis that in-person attendance was required for the final stage of the Bristol selection process and the £150 cap on reimbursing candidates’ travel expenses was discriminatory to her. She argued the same for the firm’s requirement for a London training contract to ‘permanently live and work in the UK’.
The firm submitted it had provided ‘rational and plausible’ explanations for its decisions, for example the gap between Epelle's A-level grades and its requirements.
However Epelle was never formally told of the result of the London recruitment process, where she was one of nine candidates eliminated at the screening stage.
For the Bristol process, the firm’s early careers manager wrote to Epelle noting that she had not identified a UK address, pointing out that any assessment would be held at Bristol and that the firm would be keen to know her ‘motivations specifically for Bristol’. When Epelle asked to be allowed to join the competition remotely, the careers manager emailed again, saying expenses were capped at £150 and asking if Epelle still wished to be considered.
The judge said the style and tone of the firm’s emails was ‘at very best remarkably gauche and inept and we can well understand why the claimant was offended to find herself apparently being encouraged to abandon her application’.
He said the firm had failed properly to train and supervise staff to ensure they had a clear understanding of the system. Clyde should also, he added, consider revising the process to stop candidates who do not meet the criteria thinking they have a chance – particularly in light of Epelle being encouraged to apply for future competitions.
The judge added that the ‘extraordinary failure’ to tell Epelle the outcome of her London application was ‘another deeply regrettable lapse’.
A Clyde & Co spokesperson said: 'We’re pleased the tribunal dismissed all of the claims and are confident that our recruitment processes are fair, inclusive and robust.'
No comments yet