Ms R Sargent and Others v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and Others: 2202235/2015 and Others
| Judgment Date | 01 October 2021 |
| Date | 01 October 2021 |
| Published date | 21 March 2017 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Subject Matter | Race Discrimination |
Case Number: 2202235/2015, 1303751/2015,
1401812/2015, 1601172/2015 & 1601173/2015
1
THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
BETWEEN
Claimant Respondent
(1) Ms R Sargeant AND (1) London Fire and Emergency
(2) Mr D Bebbington Planning Authority
(3) Mr M Bygrave (2) West Midlands Fire and
(4) Mr M Dodds Rescue Authority
(5) Mrs E McEvoy (3) Cornwall Fire and Rescue
Authority
(4) South Wales Fire and Rescue
Authority
(5) Secretary of State for the
Home Department
(6) The Welsh Ministers
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
HELD AT: London Central ON: 9 to 11, 13, 16 to 19 January 2017
In Chambers 20, 23 to 25 January
2017
EMPLOYMENT JUDGE: Miss A M Lewzey (sitting alone)
Representation:
For Claimants: Mr A Short QC of Counsel
Ms L Seymour of Counsel
For First, Second, Third &
Fourth Respondents: Mr A Lynch QC of Counsel
For Fifth & Sixth Respondents: Mr J Cavanagh QC of Counsel
Mr R Hill of Counsel
Ms I Proud of Counsel
Case Number: 2202235/2015, 1303751/2015,
1401812/2015, 1601172/2015 & 1601173/2015
2
RESERVED JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Tribunal is that:
(i) The treatment of the Claimants by the transitional provisions included
in the Firefighters Pension Scheme 2015 is a proportionate means of
achieving a legitimate aim and, accordingly, the claims of direct age
discrimination fail.
(ii) The claims for equal pay fail.
(iii) The claims of indirect discrimination on the grounds of sex and/or
race fail.
(iv) The piggyback claims for equal pay fail.
RESERVED REASONS
Introduction
1. These claims are brought against various Fire and Rescue Authorities
(“FRAs”) and the relevant Government Departments in relation to the transitional
provisions included in the Firefighters Pension Scheme 2015 (the “2015
Scheme”). There are in total over five thousand claims in England and Wales.
2. The lead Claimants in this multiple are members of the Fire Brigades Union
(“FBU”), who support their claims. The English lead cases are Sargeant,
Bebbington and Bygrave. The Welsh lead cases are Dodds and McEvoy.
3. The First to the Fourth Respondents, represented by Mr Lynch, are the
relevant employing Fire and Rescue Authorities (FRAs). The Fifth and Sixth
Respondents, represented by Mr Cavanagh, are the relevant Government
Departments.
4. The Home Office, the Sixth Respondent, is now responsible for the fire
service, although at the relevant time the responsible department was the
Department for Communities and Local Government (“DCLG”). The Welsh
Ministers are responsible for the pension schemes of firefighters in Wales.
Case Number: 2202235/2015, 1303751/2015,
1401812/2015, 1601172/2015 & 1601173/2015
3
5. The Claimants are employed by the FRAs, but the Home Office and the
Welsh Ministers are responsible under the Public Service Pensions Act 2013 for
establishing schemes for the payment of pensions and other benefits to fire and
rescue workers in England and Wales respectively.
6. The present cases are test cases in England and Wales. In addition, a
number of claims have been brought by firefighters in Scotland, where the
transitional provisions differ from the transitional provisions in England and Wales.
By a letter dated 22 December 2015 the President of the Scottish Employment
Tribunal notified the parties in the Scottish cases that those cases had been sisted
(stayed) pending determination of the English and Welsh cases.
7. Similar claims have been pursued in relation to the transitional protection
provided in relation to the judicial pension scheme. The decision of the
Employment Tribunal in McCloud & Others v Ministry of Justice was issued on
16 January 2017. That judgment has been referred to in these proceedings, but is
not binding on this Tribunal.
8. The parties agree that this case is suitable to be heard by an Employment
Judge sitting alone.
9. The parties have referred me to the decision of the Court of Appeal in
Naeem v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] ICR 289 (auth/33). The
Supreme Court heard the appeal in that case in November 2016. All parties have
specifically reserved the right to make further written submissions should the
decision of the Supreme Court be delivered shortly.
The Issues
10 The following is agreed as common ground:
10.1 That all of the Respondents are emanations of the state;
10.2 That the Fifth and Sixth Respondents are each a 'responsible authority' for
the purposes of section 2 of the Public Service Pensions Act 2013;
10.3 That the impugned terms of the Firefighters' Pension Scheme (FPS):
10.3.1 Comprise a provision, criteria or practice for the purposes of section 19
of the Equality Act 2010 (EA 2010);
10.3.2 Treat people who were born on or after 2 April 1971 less favourably
than people born before that date on the grounds of age;
10.3.3 Treat people who were born between 2 April 1967 and 1 April 1971 less
favourably than people born before 2 April 1967 on the grounds of age;
10.3.4 (Common ground as between the Claimants and the Fifth and Sixth
Respondents only) Disproportionately adversely affect women; and
To continue reading
Request your trial