Mr Radley & Mr Richards in person For the v Ms S Keogh, Barrister — 2019

This was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge C Palmer on 8 October 2019. Mr Radley and Mr Richards were still employed by the London Fire Commissioner. The tribunal considered strike-out and deposit applications under Rules 37 and 39 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. Mr Richards also sought to amend his case to include race discrimination because he said he was Welsh, but that application was refused because there was no credible evidence of less favourable treatment on that basis.

The tribunal considered the changes to the watch-based structure agreed in June 2019 in the Role to Rank Agreement, under which Watch Manager A became Sub Officer and Watch Manager B became Station Officer. It found no credible evidence that the differences in treatment or pay between the roles were caused by sex rather than by the differences set out in that collective agreement. The tribunal noted that the role differences applied to men and women alike within each role, and struck out both claimants' direct sex discrimination claims as having no reasonable prospect of success. The indirect sex discrimination and harassment claims had been withdrawn by the claimants and were dismissed.

Mr Radley's breach of contract claim was struck out because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear a breach of contract claim while he remained employed. His victimisation claim was struck out as out of time, and the tribunal was not persuaded that it was just and equitable to extend time; it also noted the point that the alleged detriment was paying him less, which was the same matter relied on as the protected act. Mr Richards' victimisation claim was struck out because it had no reasonable prospect of success.

The equal pay claims were not finally determined, but the tribunal held that they had little reasonable prospect of success and ordered a £1,000 deposit from each claimant if they wished to continue. The tribunal identified Ms Van Dop as the only actual comparator. It recorded that she had been a Watch Manager B since October 2018, had come through a graduate development scheme, and had different pay and status from the claimants: her salary had been £37,854, Mr Radley earned £37,209, and Mr Richards £36,479 plus London weighting. The tribunal also noted that the jobs were still in dispute on the like work/similar work question, but the deposit order was made on the basis that the claims had little reasonable prospect of success.