Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Case lawEquality, diversity and inclusionRace discrimination

Race discrimination and the scope of the Race Relations Act: Redfearn v Serco Ltd

by Personnel Today 13 Dec 2006
by Personnel Today 13 Dec 2006

This case concerned the scope of the Race Relations Act 1976, and whether an employee was entitled to rely on it when he was dismissed for being a member of the British National Party (BNP).

Mr Redfearn was employed by Serco as a driver. Serco provided transport services to the local authority, where 78% of the customers were Asian, along with 35% of its workforce.

Redfearn was a member of the BNP, and a local newspaper ran an article about his role as a candidate for the BNP in the local elections. Following the publication of the article, Serco received a letter from Unison saying that many of Serco’s employees found Redfearn’s continued employment of concern, considering the BNP’s apparently racist agenda. Unison looked to Serco to take immediate action to ensure its members were not subjected to the racial hatred promoted by the BNP. The GMB union, along with individual employees, also made similar representations to Serco.

Following Redfearn’s election as a local councillor for the BNP, he was summarily dismissed by Serco on grounds that he would “present a risk to the health and safety of its employers and customers” and may well damage the reputation of the company and jeopardise its contract with the local authority.

Following his dismissal, Redfearn brought a claim for direct race discrimination. He argued that Serco had treated him less favourably by dismissing him on grounds of the ethnicity of the customers he transported. But Redfearn had one year’s service, and so was unable to bring a claim for unfair dismissal.

Although Redfearn only claimed direct race discrimination, the tribunal went on to consider indirect discrimination.

The tribunal rejected Redfearn’s claim of direct discrimination, stating that his dismissal was not on “racial grounds”.

In relation to indirect discrimination, the tribunal held that Serco’s dismissal of Redfearn was a proportionate means to achieve the legitimate aim of maintaining health and safety. Redfearn appealed.

The EAT agreed with Redfearn that the tribunal was wrong to say that the Showboat principal – Showboat Entertainment Centre v Owens (1984 IRLR 7, EAT), where an employee was sacked for refusing to exclude black customers and was thereby affected by the race of a third party – should not be applied. The EAT also said the tribunal’s stance on indirect discrimination could not be upheld as it had not been shown how Redfearn’s dismissal was a proportionate means to achieve a legitimate aim.

Serco’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was upheld on the grounds that Redfearn’s view of the Showboat principle was too wide, as the purpose of the legislation is to protect employees who refuse to implement a policy of their employer that is racially discriminatory. It also said that as Redfearn had not claimed indirect discrimination, it should never have been considered in the first place.

Key points

  • The Court of Appeal rejected the EAT’s decision, the logical conclusion of which appeared to be that an employer dismissing an employee for racially abusing another employee would itself be guilty of race discrimination – a very worrying consequence. Lord Justice Mummery, delivering the decision, said: “I am confident that this is not the kind of case for which the anti-discrimination legislation was designed.”
  • The Court of Appeal noted that this case, which had been “conducted against a background of the fundamental human rights of freedom of political belief… mingled with race relations, trade union power, local politics and job security issues”, related only to a claim for race discrimination. Had Redfearn had one full year of service with the company, he may well have succeeded with an unfair dismissal claim.

What you should do

  • Carefully consider whether dismissal really is justified purely for membership of an organisation such as the BNP. If you have legitimate concerns about workplace tensions or health and safety issues, investigate whether there are less risky ways of tackling the problem.
  • Be aware that discrimination claims can arise in circumstances where dismissals would appear (at least to the employer) to be entirely justified.
  • Take reasonable steps to minimise the risk of a race claim by preventing discriminatory behaviour in the first place. Make sure all employees are aware of your organisation’s equal opportunities policy.

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

2 out of 5 stars

(Star rating: Each case is rated from one to five stars: the more essential it is that you know about it, the more stars it will have.)

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
Opt-in pensions plan seen as positive move by employers and unions
next post
Smoking ban in England: Preparing to go smoke-free

You may also like

Fewer workers would comply with a return-to-office mandate

21 May 2025

Redefining leadership: From competence to inclusion

21 May 2025

Consultation launched after Supreme Court ‘sex’ ruling

20 May 2025

Black security manager awarded £360k after decade of...

20 May 2025

EHRC bows to pressure and extends gender consultation

15 May 2025

Culture, ‘micro-incivilities’ and invisible talent

14 May 2025

Contract cleaner loses EAT race discrimination appeal

14 May 2025

Why fighting the DEI backlash is about PR...

9 May 2025

So what does the election of a new...

9 May 2025

Rethinking talent: Who was never considered in the...

7 May 2025

  • 2025 Employee Communications Report PROMOTED | HR and leadership...Read more
  • The Majority of Employees Have Their Eyes on Their Next Move PROMOTED | A staggering 65%...Read more
  • Prioritising performance management: Strategies for success (webinar) WEBINAR | In today’s fast-paced...Read more
  • Self-Leadership: The Key to Successful Organisations PROMOTED | Eletive is helping businesses...Read more
  • Retaining Female Talent: Four Ways to Reduce Workplace Drop Out PROMOTED | International Women’s Day...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+