Camau cyfreithiol
Clarifying the protections of the Equality Act for migrant workers
Wedi ei gyhoeddi: 20 Ebrill 2016
Diweddarwyd diwethaf: 22 Mehefin 2016
I ba wledydd mae hyn yn berthnasol?
Manylion yr achos
Nodwedd warchodedig | Hil |
---|---|
Mathau o hawliadau cydraddoldeb | Gwahaniaethu uniongyrchol |
Llys neu dribiwnlys | Goruchaf Lys |
Rhaid dilyn y penderfyniad i mewn | Lloegr, Alban, Cymru |
Mae'r gyfraith yn berthnasol i | Lloegr, Alban, Cymru |
Cyflwr yr achos | Wedi gorffen |
Ein cyfranogiad | Cymorth cyfreithiol (adran 28 o Ddeddf Cydraddoldeb 2006) |
Canlyniad | Barn |
Meysydd o fywyd | Gwaith |
Gyfraith Hawliau Dynol | Erthygl 4: Rhyddid rhag caethwasiaeth a llafur gorfodol |
Enw achos: Taiwo & Anor v Olaigbe & Ors
A woman who came to the UK as a migrant domestic worker was abused and exploited by her employer. She successfully brought several claims against the employer, but her claim for race discrimination did not succeed. We supported her to challenge this in the Supreme Court.
Mater cyfreithiol
Lack of protection for exploited migrant domestic workers under the Equality Act.
Cefndir
A woman came to the UK to work as a nanny and housekeeper. She claimed to have been verbally and physically abused by her employers. They took her passport away, put restrictions on her movements, failed to pay her the minimum wage and forced her to work an excessive number of hours. She challenged her employers through the courts. Although some of her claims were successful, her claim for race discrimination did not succeed. She appealed this, but the Court of Appeal agreed that she hadn’t be a victim of race discrimination. She made a further challenge to the Supreme Court.
Pam roedden ni'n cymryd rhan
One of our primary goals is to protect the rights of people in the most vulnerable situations. Migrant domestic workers can be particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They are usually dependent on their employers for housing as well as immigration status. They may speak little or no English and because the nature of their work is in private homes, the way they are treated is largely hidden from view. We hoped that this case would pave the way for exploited migrant workers to bring claims for race discrimination and be compensated accordingly.
Beth wnaethom ni
We paid the woman’s legal costs so she could challenge the earlier finding that she had not been a victim of race discrimination.
Beth ddigwyddodd
The Supreme Court confirmed earlier rulings that the woman had not been a victim of race discrimination. The court agreed that her immigration status as an overseas domestic worker made her more vulnerable to exploitation than a British national would be. However, claims under the Equality Act must demonstrate discrimination on the grounds of a protected characteristic, and immigration status is not one of these. The Judge ruled that immigration status is not closely enough linked to nationality (which is a protected characteristic) to permit a claim under the Equality Act. The Judge made clear that exploitation of migrant workers is wrong and they should be entitled to compensation – but that the law as it stands does not provide a means of doing so.
Pwy fydd yn elwa
Exploitation and abuse of migrant workers is a major concern for us. We wanted to send a clear message to employers that it is illegal and we will take action. Although the outcome of the case was disappointing, the Judge’s suggestion that the law may need amending is a helpful one and we hope will lead to a strengthening of protection for migrant workers in future.
Dyddiad y gwrandawiad
Dyddiad dod i ben
Diweddariadau tudalennau
Cyhoeddwyd
20 Ebrill 2016
Diweddarwyd diwethaf
22 Mehefin 2016