FAIR EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL

CASE REFS:  13/07FET;
80/07

CLAIMANT:			Pauline Buchanan

RESPONDENT:			GMB Trade Union

DECISION ON A PRE-HEARING REVIEW

(1)	The provisions of Article 20 of the Employment (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 (“the 2003 Order”), which refer to a requirement to present a grievance in writing to the employer and wait for 28 days before presenting a claim to the tribunal, do not prohibit the presentation of any relevant complaint by this claimant to the Tribunal.

(2)	The provisions of Article 19 of the 2003 Order, regarding the requirement to present a grievance in writing to the employer and wait for 28 days before presenting a claim to an industrial tribunal, do not have the effect of preventing the claimant from presenting any relevant claim.

(3)	The claim in respect of the August 1999 recruitment process (referred to below as “act 12”) was not presented within the primary time limit provided for in Article 76(1) of the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 (“the 1976 Order”).  Furthermore, it is not just and equitable (within the meaning to Article 76(5) of the 1976 Order) for an industrial tribunal to consider the claim.

(4)	The latter claim (in respect of the 1999 recruitment process) was not presented within the primary time limit provided for in Article 46(1) of the Fair Employment and Treatment (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 (“the 1998 Order”).  Furthermore, it is not just and equitable (within the meaning of Article 46(5) of the 1998 Order) for the Tribunal to consider the claim.

(5)	All of the other claims brought under the 1976 Order were brought within one of the applicable time limits.

(6)	All of the other claims brought under the 1998 Order were brought within one of the applicable time limits.

Constitution of Tribunal:
Chairman (Sitting Alone):	Mr Buggy
Appearances:
The claimant was represented by Mr Mark McEvoy, Barrister-at-Law, instructed by Agnew Andress Higgins, Solicitors.
The respondent was represented by Mr G Daly of Francis Hanna & Co, Solicitors.

REASONS

 1.	The claimant was employed by the respondent from the year 2000 until October 2006.

The claims

 2.	In these proceedings, the claimant makes claims of direct discrimination on the ground of religion, direct discrimination on the ground of gender, and victimisation discrimination (within the meaning of the Fair Employment and Treatment Order 1998).

 3.	The following is a comprehensive list of all the acts of which complaint is made in the present proceedings, indicating, in respect of each act, whether the claim is one of direct religious discrimination (“DD/R”), direct discrimination on the ground of gender (“DD/S”) or victimisation discrimination (“VD/R”).  The list is as follows:

	(1)	Mr Leonard was told prematurely of the job offer which the claimant received from the ICTU (DD/R, DD/S and VD/R).

	(2)	The “whore” remark (DD/S and the statutory tort of harassment).

	(3)	The claimant was required, in July 2006, to work with Mr Dawson (VD).

	(4)	At a meeting on 8 September, Mr Leonard failed to provide a satisfactory explanation as to why he had instructed the claimant to work directly with Mr Dawson (VD).

	(5)	After the meeting on 8 September 2006, GMB representatives were “tipped off” about relevant matters (VD).

	(6)	On 13 September 2006, an inaccurate memorandum (about the 8 September meeting) was sent to the claimant (VD).

	(7)	The claimant’s name was removed from the list of conference delegates for a conference which was to be held in October 2006 (VD).

	(8)	There was a controversy about the claimant’s late arrival at the relevant conference (VD).

	(9)	Mr Mandelson was told (in Autumn of 2006) that the claimant had resigned from GMB (DD/R, DD/S and VD),

	(10)	On 27 September 2006, Mr Mandelson told the claimant that he presumed that she was withdrawing her application for National Organiser of the GMB, because, he said, he had been informed that she had resigned from the GMB (DD/S and VD).

	(11)	In October 2002, Mr Dawson sent documents to Mr Pat Dyer which amounted to complaints from Mr Dawson in which the claimant was named.  (DD/R, DD/S and VD).

	(12)	In August 1999, Mr Dawson was the successful candidate for a job for which the claimant applied (DD/R and DD/S).

	(13)	In early December 2006, Mr Paul McCarthy e-mailed Mr Peter Bunting, to ask him what the claimant’s position is in ICTU and to state that she should not be representing members of GMBU (DD/R and VD).

Reasons for the above decision

 4.	The reasons for the above decision were given orally at the conclusion of the hearing.  

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing:	20 August 2007, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: