Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College: Difference between revisions

{{Cquote|Once a finding of a condition having a disparate and adverse impact on women had been made, what was required was at the minimum a critical evaluation of whether the college's reasons demonstrated a real need to dismiss the applicant; if there was such a need, consideration of the seriousness of the disparate impact of the dismissal on women including the applicant; and an evaluation of whether the former were sufficient to outweigh the latter. There is no sign of this process in the tribunal's extended reasons.}}

 

The ECJ held<ref>See also [2004] IRLR 224</ref> that despite the contract saying they were self-employed, and despite national legislation under the [[Equal Pay Act 1970]] applying only to employees, workers and those personally performing work (which may have brought the outside the Act's protection<ref>c.f. ''[[Mingeley v Pennock and Ivory (t/a Amber Cars)|Mingeley v Pennock and Ivory]]'' [2004] EWCA Civ 328</ref>) the lecturers did fall within the Community definition of worker.