Advance Inclusion in your workplace
Lead the way to create inclusive workplaces with expert support, tailored resources, and a vibrant member community. Inclusive Employers membership gives you the tools and insights to advance inclusion and make a lasting impact.
We are not lawyers at Inclusive Employers, but we are experienced practitioners and understand what employers need to know. With each piece of discrimination case law that we share the legal judgement is set into an employment context – what you need to know and what you should do.
This blog will explore the Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen case. Keep reading to learn more about the background of the case and what employers should know.
The case: Allay (UK) Ltd v Gehlen (4 February 2021)
- Protected Characteristics involved: Race
- Legal Principle involved? Reasonable steps defence under s109(4) Equality Act 2010
- UK or EU Judgement? UK – Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT)
Why is this case important?
There are only a few reported cases regarding the reasonable steps defence. There is a high threshold to establish all reasonable steps have been taken, and offering training as a tick-box exercise is unlikely to meet it. When seeking to rely on training as a step, employers should note that the Tribunal will review the quality of the training and how regularly it is provided.
Stay up to date with the latest inclusion news and events
Gain expert guidance, tailored support, and resources to drive inclusion at work. Join a community of professionals, enhance your skills, and make a lasting impact on your organisation.
Explore the benefits of Membership
What’s the case about?
The Claimant, Mr Gehlen, worked as a senior data analyst and after being dismissed for poor performance, he claimed at Employment Tribunal that he had been subject to race discrimination and racial harassment. The Tribunal determined that Mr Gehlen had been subjected to regular racist comments and his claim for racial harassment was upheld.
The Respondent tried to on the reasonable steps defence, namely that it had taken all reasonable steps to prevent the harassment, due to its policies and provision of relevant training to employees including the perpetrator. The perpetrator had received anti-bullying and harassment training, and equality and diversity training, some 20 months earlier. However, the defence failed and the Respondent appealed.
The EAT stated that it was entitled to find that the training delivered to employees had become “stale” and required refreshing. The original Employment Tribunal decision was upheld.
The EAT said it is legitimate to consider how effective the steps were likely to be and how effective they have proved to be in practice. In this case, the training was no longer effective as demonstrated by the racist comments. A further reasonable step would have been to offer refresher training, and therefore the employer could not show that all reasonable steps had been taken. The fact that the perpetrator was required to undergo training after the harassment was further evidence that it was necessary.
What do you need to know?
Simply offering training as a tick-box exercise is unlikely to suffice, employers must consider the quality of the training and how regularly it is provided.
Next steps to becoming inclusion confident
Find out how Inclusive Employers can support your organisation in creating a more inclusive workplace. Fill in the form to learn more about Inclusive Employers membership and how we can help you make lasting, impactful changes.