Two pregnant ladies

I find myself in a rather unusual position at work. I currently line manage two members of staff (one of who manages the rest of the team), and it so happens they are both pregnant!

Naturally, I’m thrilled to bits for them, particularly as they’re both first time mums and I recently became a dad, so I do know what it’s like in terms of excitement and anticipation, and how fab it is to be a parent. Obviously, I don’t know what it’s like to carry a baby (!) but I do know what Rachel went through and have witnessed a labour first hand!

The weird thing about all this (yes, I’m getting to the point of this post now) is that while I’m absolutely thrilled for both of them, it’s also my worst nightmare! Both of them are valuable members of my team, and when they are both on maternity leave, I don’t know how we’re going to cope!

I know I’m being irrational, because the team as a whole is full of hard working individuals and we’ll cope just fine. That’s not to say it ain’t going to be a challenge, but bring it on! I’ve already got contingency plans in place.

One last thing, huge, huge, huge congratulations to them both! Enjoy the experience!

Equality Act 2010

On 1 October 2010, the new Equality Act 2010 (“the EA”) came into force. It’s basically an amalgamation of the infamous Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (“the DDA”) with the Race Relations Act 1976, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, and the various statutory instruments that cover age, sexual orientation, religion and belief, and brings the various strands under one roof, labelled “protected characteristics”.

In theory, it will make it “easier” for those with protected characteristics to make a claim for discrimination in the Employment Tribunal or County Court. Whether it does, remains to be seen.

As a solicitor specialising in discrimination law, this will have huge ramifications on my work. The first thing I looked at was the transitional arrangements. It’s not as simple as saying “awh, just claim everything under the EA, doesn’t matter when the discrimination happened!”. The rules are thus:

If an act or acts occurred wholly before 1 October 2010, then they will be dealt with under the old legislation. If they happened on 1 October 2010 onwards, then they will be dealt with under the EA.

What about continuing acts of discrimination though? That is to say, acts of discrimination that started before 1 October 2010 but continued after this date? It seems that these will fall under the EA.

On a practical level, I now need to edit all our precedents, although I’ll probably do this on a one-by-one basis as I don’t have the time to edit them all in one go!

One other thing. Obviously I deal with disability discrimination on a day to day basis; the main changes to the DDA are as follows:

  1. Disability-related discrimination has been scrapped. This is good news because the judgment made by the House of Lords in the London Borough of Lewisham v Malcolm [2008] case made it extremely difficult for claimants to succeed under this part of the DDA, and has now been reversed by the EA with the new concept of discrimination arising from a disability. If any of you want me to explain what was so damning about the Malcolm case, comment and I’ll explain.
  2. The introduction of indirect discrimination to disability discrimination, bringing it in line with the concept already familiar in in sex and race discrimination.
  3. Harmonising the thresholds for the duty to make reasonable adjustments for disabled people.
  4. Making it more difficult for disabled people to be unfairly screened out when applying for jobs, by restricting the circumstances in which employers can ask job applicants questions about disability or health.

I look forward to working with the EA and it’ll certainly make a change from working with that old dinosaur, the DDA!

“It’s not “the DDA” any more; it’s “the EA”!

Tribunal advocacy

Right, we know there are not many Deaf lawyers in the UK.

We know that there are even fewer Deaf lawyers undertaking advocacy in tribunals and court.

I’m one of them. As an employment solicitor, I undertake advocacy in the Employment Tribunal on a regular basis.

Now, bear in mind that I’m profoundly Deaf and my first language is English as opposed to say BSL. I am a fluent BSL user, equally comfortable with spoken English. However, I’d be the first to admit that I do not have perfect speech; I’ve never actually *heard* a word so go figure. My voice is rather high pitched, and I tend to trip over my words from time to time or mulch all the words into one big mush as I don’t allow time to elocute-each-word-fully.

A weird byproduct of my “imperfect” speech is that some people understand me, and some don’t. I find I’m sometimes able to identify who falls into these categories: females in the former, and males in the latter; individuals who know how to LISTEN and those who don’t.

So, I undertake tribunal advocacy with imperfect speech. I hear you say: “that’s easy! Just use BSL!”. Well, yes, I could, but that would mean translating complex legal principles etc. into BSL and then hoping, just hoping, that the interpreter will be able to grasp the legal principle as well as the point I’m making, and voice over that in a way that is appropriate for such a situation i.e. formal language with legalese thrown in.

Are there actually any interpreters out there able to do this for me? And can they go to each tribunal regardless of location within England and Wales to do exactly that? I doubt it.

So, therein lies the problem. How does one solve it? Answers on a postcard please.

Supervision vs management

I went on a “Supervision Training for Managers” course yesterday afternoon and realised I’d been doing supervision sessions with my staff (I currently manage 6 staff) all wrong! Oops.

Apparently, where I’ve been going wrong is to discuss both supervision AND management issues in a supervision session. This begs the question: “what’s the difference between the two?!”.

Management issues are the usual run of the mill, day to day things like annual leave, toil, outreach, general admin etc., whereas supervision should be focusing on the individual supervisee; their wellbeing, personal development and training, feedback from clients – both positive and negative – and have to be linked to the organisation’s overall strategic objectives. Phew!

I’m on another course today, “Non-employment discrimination”, so a return to more “legal” matters!

RAD Legal Services

Meet my wonderful team at RAD.

rls

Back (L-R): Desmond Masterson, Laura Eadsforth, Daniel Webster, me, Shaunett Harris, Riccardo Hoyte.
Front (L-R): Amanda Everitt, Rose Hawes, Paul Lennon, Lianne Lusty.

This photo was taken at the RAD Staff Conference on 5 June 2009.