Please read and share to help ensure an informed debate. We believe this is an unnecessary amendment and we support Lyndsay Feltham’s proposition. The proposition to increase the maximum compensation awarded at Tribunal for discrimination related claims is based on recommendations put forward by the Employment Forum, whose consultation we welcomed and were please to contribute to. Our 2023 annual review lays out our rationale for increasing the maximum compensation awarded at Tribunal (page 14), as well as other recommendations for strengthening the current legislation. https://lnkd.in/evVFfA7m States Assembly – Jersey's elected parliament Government of Jersey
CEO at Freeda - Free From Domestic Abuse | Founder at Arbre & The Diversity Network | Cultural Change | Social Justice | Community Building | Equity & Inclusion |
🤯I have to say, this amendment has really confused and worried me. The amendment in question relates to a proposition raised by Lyndsay Feltham - based on the recommendations of the respected Employment Forum regarding the appropriate level and structure of Employment Tribunal compensation awards in Jersey. I really struggle to believe that the author of the amendment intended, as he does in his statement, to:- - imply that in Jersey’s business community, the inherent value of employing people with disabilities and ‘differences’ is secondary to the financial risks. - position the potential cost of getting it ‘wrong’ as a barrier to employing individuals with ‘differences’. - reinforce unfair and harmful stereotypes that people with disabilities and ‘differences’ are ‘risky’ hires, and therefore to reinforce a culture of discrimination in our workplaces. So, to bring this amendment forward, the author must have been persuaded that there are enough terrible employers in the island that the proposed £50k max award at tribunal for the most extreme cases of discrimination will lead to a significant and detrimental impact on our economy, when they stop recruiting people with ‘differences’ and/or they all go bust as a result?* This is very worrying indeed if he’s right.😮 And it really doesn’t reflect the positive attitude and ethics of the employers and business leaders I have worked with, thankfully. I know with my HR hat on that even good employers can make mistakes sometimes. But if so many employers in Jersey are genuinely at ‘catastrophic’ risk due to the worst kinds of unethical and poor business practices then I think, actually, the argument for strengthening our legislation even further than Deputy Feltham has proposed is warranted. If the hefty ET costs don’t bring them down, then I suspect that there are many other risks of their own making that will cause such businesses ultimately to fail. Supporting Deputy Feltham’s proposition, and the Employment Forum’s recommendations, is an opportunity for our CoM and States Assembly Members to send a powerful message that in Jersey we value human beings above unethical employers and we want a modern and thriving business community. Let’s hope they see this.🙏🏻🤞 *To put this in context, in the U.K., around 5% of successful claims at Employment Tribunal received the maximum sanction for disability discrimination. https://lnkd.in/eT_GfGkm Government of Jersey States Assembly – Jersey's elected parliament Jersey Community Relations Trust (JCRT) The Diversity Network IoD Jersey Jersey Chamber of Commerce Chris Craddock Jonathan Wills Jodie Yettram Lyndon Farnham Kirsten Morel Louise Doublet Hilary Jeune Raluca Kovacs 🇯🇪🇷🇴 Inna Gardiner Carina Alves Carla Benest (she/her) Julia-Anne Dix Simon Nash Daniel Read Selina Zenonos (she/her/hers) 🇯🇪🇵🇹 FCMgr Kaye Nicholson (she/her) Ant Lewis Kirsten Morel