Ms S Vaughan v Usdaw — 2024

The claimant, Ms S Vaughan, a long-serving Area Organiser employed by USDAW from 2005 until her retirement on 3 March 2023, brought a single complaint of direct sex discrimination under s13 of the Equality Act 2010. The complaint concerned the respondent's unwritten Car Policy and the calculation of her Retirement Award, which she said was less favourable than awards paid to two male comparators (Mr Gorle and Mr Ireland) whose awards were calculated by reference to the notional value of an electric vehicle following the respondent's 2022/2023 change of fleet supplier.

The Tribunal accepted that there was a difference in treatment between the claimant and her two male comparators. However, applying the burden of proof guidance in Madarassy, Bahl v The Law Society and Zafar v Glasgow City Council, it found that the claimant had not pointed to 'something more' than a difference in status and a difference in treatment, so the burden of proof did not shift to the respondent. The Tribunal also found that, even if the burden had shifted, the reason for the differential treatment was not sex: a male Area Organiser (Mr O'Neill) had received a Retirement Award calculated on the same basis as the claimant, and the increased awards to Mr Gorle and Mr Ireland were made to avoid a formal dispute being pursued against the respondent.

The Tribunal also noted that the respondent had offered, after the claimant's retirement, to pay the difference between her Retirement Award and an award calculated on the same basis as Mr Gorle, subject to the claimant entering into an ACAS COT3 agreement, which she refused. The complaint of direct sex discrimination failed and was dismissed.