A SENIOR civil servant could have been given the highest salary package because she was a black woman, the employment council said.
HM Police Inspector, Wendy Williams, used to compare HMI colleague Matthew Parr, who was paid £ 52,000 less for the same job.
He sued the Employment Court against the Interior Ministry, arguing he was discriminated against on the grounds of race and sex because he was white.
Interior Clerk Priti PatelMs. Williams, assisted by Ms. Williams, attempted to calculate wages due to court disclosures, but their case was rejected.
The London Center Job Court has now ruled that Mr. Parr is not discriminated against because he is first on the new pay scale and is therefore unable to use Ms. Williams as a comparator.
However, they concluded that the department feared possible allegations around her salary and that she had benefited from the positive discrimination.
Matthew Parr, one of the five Constabulary’s HM Inspector (HMI), who oversees the UK police force, claims that “pitiful” attempts to bring down hefty payouts have left him distracted. treat him because he is white.
Former Royal Navy officer and Rear Admiral took up a £ 133,983 job in 2016 when former Prime Minister Theresa May was interior minister.
He was paid an additional £ 7,904 a living allowance in London, but still paid less than Ms. Williams, appointed 15 months earlier with a salary of more than £ 185,000 in a pay bracket of £ 165,000 to £ 185,000.
Employment Judge Richard Nicolle said: “We find that Ms. Williams is a black woman, and that the Respondent’s perception of litigation and the reputable risks she may pose, is reasonable. due to this sudden and significant increase.
“We do not think it is possible to allocate Ms. Williams’ salary increase due to her gender or race concerns as distinctly protected traits but rather that she is a woman of skin. Black gave her a negotiating lever to raise her salary and as a result she benefited because of what was supposed to constitute positive discrimination in her favor.
“We find that the Respondent considers the Plaintiff to be a white male and poses little legal and reputational risk if he seeks to challenge his waiver on grounds of equality / discrimination. .
“Consequently, we find that Ms. Williams’ salary increase from £ 165,000 to £ 185,791 is affected by the Defendant’s concern that the originally proposed discrepancy between her wages and those of incumbents Caucasian skin poses a legal and reputable risk to the Home Office.
“The difference is not due to gender differences, but rather the positive discrimination to which Ms. Williams benefits.”
The Employment Judge added: “Ms. Williams’ decision to raise wages may have constituted positive discrimination in her favor, at least partly because the Respondent’s perception that she is a woman. black poses a greater risk of litigation and credibility than Plaintiff did at the time of his appointment, which does not automatically constitute the less favorable treatment of Plaintiff on the grounds of his race. . “
At the time of his appointment, the Treasury was trying to cut costs and discuss paying her a similar salary to the one Mr. Parr would then receive but decided that there would be “at risk. Legal challenge due to discrimination “if they do so. .
Mr. Parr told an employment board that she was paid because the Home Office was concerned about “damage to reputation” and said he would accept paychecks and not demand compensation.
Britain is responsible for forces in London, Bedfordshire, Northern Ireland, the National Crime Agency, the Counterterrorism Policy Network, national forces such as the British Transport Police and Territory forces. Overseas territory.
He also oversees the London Fire Brigade and five other services.
Ms. Williams oversees forces in Wales and western England.
“For me, this is basically a question of fairness,” Mr. Parr told the court.
“It’s basically unfair to pay people incredibly different amounts of money to do the same job, by any means.”
Employment Judge Richard Nicolle said: “We believe that cost considerations are an important factor for Respondents in assessing and setting new pay scales.
“Evidence shows significant pressure from the Ministry of Finance to reduce HMI payments because of austerity but also shows that their salaries are ‘excessive’ compared to other comparable public positions.
“At the time of his appointment, we found that an equivalent black male would be provided and paid the same as Claimant’s remuneration.
The woman in charge of the dog who caught the Freddie seal is the QC who lives in a pile of £ 5 million
HOL A MO
Prime Minister warned it’s ‘too early’ to book overseas vacations now and will reveal more after DAYS
“Given that the benchmarking exercise has been done and the new pay scales are being set after Ms. Williams’ appointment, the Respondent has reason to pay a different salary to the Plaintiff.
“Therefore, Ms. Williams is not an exact comparator.
“Hence, we reject direct racist claims.”