The case of Chagger v Abbey National plc & Hopkins of 2006, where the Employment Tribunal applied the reverse burden of proof provisions of section 54A, the 2003 amendment to the Race Relations Act 1976, and consequently made an unprecedented compensation award of £2.8 million, is a landmark case of workplace discrimination in the UK. Workplace discrimination is against the law in the UK. There are different types of workplace discrimination that can occur, each of which can have legal ramifications if and when incidents involving workplace discrimination do occur. The different types of workplace discrimination include sex discrimination, age discrimination, race discrimination, religious discrimination, sexual discrimination, and disability discrimination as well as a form of discrimination known as bullying in the work environment.



There are laws in place that protect employees in the UK from workplace discrimination; such laws are identified as 'equal opportunity' laws. If one employee is treated in a manner that is less favourable than other employees in the workplace due to personal or professional biases, then issues of workplace discrimination can arise. The laws that exist in the UK protect UK employees since they do not permit employers to discriminate against employees or to release employees from their positions based on the employees' age, disability status, ethnicity, gender, marital status, nationality, race, religion, or sexual preferences.

Just as there are different types of workplace discrimination, how the discrimination occurs also varies. An employer may discriminate against an employee directly, indirectly, via harassing methods, or via incidents involving bullying. When an employer discriminates against an individual directly, the employer clearly expresses a preference for one employee or one type of employee over another. For instance, if a hospital refused to allow men to work in nursing positions, that would be an example of discrimination occurring directly against those of the male gender.

Indirectly aimed discrimination against an individual arises the moment when an employer implements regulations that put a particular individual or an entire group of individuals in a position of being disadvantaged by the regulations in place. An example of indirectly aimed discrimination might involve an employer that has set a rule that the entire staff must attend mandatory staff meetings, but who does not make the area where meetings are held accessible to the disabled.

Workplace discrimination also includes harassment in the work environment. Every individual has the right to be completely comfortable in the workplace and no one has the legal right to mock, ridicule, or to deride another in the workplace setting. The latter example is only one form of workplace harassment as there are many different types of harassment including sexual harassment. Along the same lines, bullying in the work environment is also against the law. Bullying can present itself in a number of forms in the workplace and such forms can include intentional humiliation of an employee either when the individual is alone or when he or she is in the presence of others, verbal abuse, physical abuse, excessive workloads, and the denial of deserved or earned workplace opportunities.

When workplace discrimination occurs, the individual or individuals discriminated against can legally fight the employer(s) that are responsible for the discriminatory action. If an employee has exhausted all other resources in the effort to resolve the issue by filing appropriate grievances, he or she can consider escalating the matter to an Employment Tribunal. Employees that are discriminated against can file a claim so that an Employment Tribunal can hear and judge the matter. The Employment Tribunal is a free public service for which neither the employee nor the employer has to pay.

Employers may be faced with accusations of discrimination in one of its many forms, as was Abbey National (part of the Banco Santander Group) faced with issues relating to race discrimination. The Tribunal's transcript of proceedings shows that Abbey National and Nigel Hopkins faced opposing a racial discrimination action by Balbinder Chagger, a former employee of the company, after he had been dismissed ostensibly for reasons of redundancy. Mr Chagger attempted to resolve the issues surrounding his dismissal directly with Abbey National and his manager, Mr Hopkins, through the company's internal complaints and grievance procedures. However, his issues were dismissed out of hand. He then escalated the matter to the Employment Tribunal. Mr Chagger argued that he was unfairly dismissed and that he was discriminated against due to his Indian race and ethnicity. Abbey National's position was that it dismissed Mr Chagger based on a need to cut cost.

The Employment Tribunal found, amongst other things, that Mr Chagger had been unfairly dismissed and that Abbey National and his manager, Mr Hopkins, had discriminated against him on the grounds of race in respect of his dismissal. Consequently, the Tribunal ordered Abbey National to re-instate Mr Chagger in order to remedy its wrongdoing. Abbey, however, refused to comply with the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal then ordered Abbey National to pay Mr Chagger the unprecedented £2.8 million in compensation for his loss on the basis that he had not been re-instated. Mr Chagger had argued that he was forced to leave a high paying position at Abbey National, paying him £100,000 on an annual basis, and that he eventually had to retrain as a teacher.

Abbey National and Mr Hopkins appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) against the verdict of race discrimination and against the amount of the compensation award. In 2008, the EAT upheld the original Employment Tribunal's findings of race discrimination and, thus, Abbey National's appeal on the race discrimination verdict failed. Abbey National's appeal on the unprecedented size of the compensation award was, however, accepted and the EAT sent back the compensation to the original Employment Tribunal for reconsideration on the basis of the likelihood of Mr Chagger leaving Abbey National's employment in any event.