E-mail this to a friend
Print this
Deaf Man Wins Disability Discrimination Claim
16 January 2008
A deaf man has won his claim of disability discrimination against Multipulse Electronics Ltd after being refused consideration for a job for which he was clearly qualified. In a scathing judgment, the Employment Tribunal said that Multipulse Electronics basis for turning down Keith Wynn was "founded on the worst type of stereotypical assumptions" and noted the firm should consider equal opportunities training as an alternative to "a potentially expensive learning curve."
Mr Wynn is profoundly deaf and a British Sign Language User. The 45-year-old from East Molesey, Surrey, is considered disabled under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. Mr Wynn was employed by Thales, the electronics manufacturer, for 25 years - where he was employed as a 'Wire Person'. During his employment at Thales, Mr Wynn communicated via lip reading and writing. However, in August 2006, Mr Wynn was made redundant along with other employees due to Thales financial difficulties.
In September 2006, Mr Wynn applied to Multipulse Electronics for a Wire Person post but, despite agreeing to interview him, they cancelled because they had not arranged a sign language interpreter. Mr Wynn heard nothing from Multipluse Electronics after this cancellation and therefore wrote a letter on 15 November 2006 to which he received no reply. He sent a further letter on 16 January 2006 stating that if he heard nothing again he would contact the RNID Legal Case Work Team for advice. Mr Wynn then received a reply on 1 February 2007 from the Multipulse Electronics Company Secretary stating that due to Multipulse Electronics being a small company it gives instructions orally and thus it would not be possible for a company of its size to employ a specialist interpreter.
Perfect man for the job
At the Tribunal, the Company Secretary noted that Mr Wynn's skills and abilities were not an issue but argued that the company did not have sufficient resources to employ Mr Wynn. However, during the hearing, the Company Secretary also admitted to not having asked Mr Wynn, or made any enquiries generally, if additional resources would be necessary. He also conceded that he gave no thought to what reasonable adjustments could be made to stop Mr Wynn from being at a disadvantage and, staggeringly, admitted that had a person with Mr Wynn's skills and abilities applied for a position but had not been deaf, the company would have been likely to recruit them. The Tribunal noted here that it considered "that there was a good deal of force" in Mr Wynn's submission "that he was the perfect man for the job."
Worse kind of stereotypical assumptions
The Tribunal concluded that Mr Wynn was less favourably treated on the grounds of his disability and that only very slight adjustments would need to be made to accommodate Mr Wynn - which, the Tribunal noted, would be uncomplicated, inexpensive, and practical for Multipulse Electronics to implement. On these grounds, the Tribunal observed that the basis for turning down Mr Wynn was "founded on the worst type of stereotypical assumptions" and that all of the company's actions "were predicated on ignorant, erroneous, stereotypical assumptions of Mr Wynn's abilities."
Responses to the judgment
Samantha Mangwana, Mr Wynn's solicitor in the award-winning Employment Law Team at Russell Jones & Walker said:
"Mr Wynn was subjected to discriminatory treatment on account of his disability and denied employment for which he was clearly qualified. Multipulse Electronics failed not only to make reasonable adjustments but also even to investigate what steps should be taken to ensure a potential employee is not put at a disadvantage because of their disability. We hope that this judgment will make employers aware that they must not only consider reasonable adjustments for current employees but also all potential employees."
Mr Wynn said:
"I was deeply upset and depressed by Multipulse Electronics decision to deny me an opportunity to secure employment because of my disability. It is indeed unfortunate when experienced and capable individuals are not given the chance to make a contribution to the workplace. It is vital that those who are in this position speak out against this maltreatment."
Dr Mark Baker, Head of Social Research and Policy at Royal National Institute for Deaf and hard of hearing people (RNID), said:
"RNID is delighted at the tribunal's decision and the amount awarded to Mr Wynn. Both are strong signs that the legal system is not afraid to flex its muscles in support of disabled people's rights.
"We hope that the outcome will encourage more employers to follow RNID's advice about making the simple, cheap and easy adjustments that enable competent deaf and hard of hearing people to do their jobs, and avoid costly legal cases."
Remedy
Mr Wynn has been awarded a significant sum for loss of earnings and injury to feelings.