Manchester on sex bias charges

April 10, 1998

Manchester University is facing two further complaints of discrimination four months after an industrial tribunal ruled that the university "failed dismally" to follow equal opportunities procedures, writes Phil Baty.

In December last year a tribunal said that the university's handling of its seven-year race discrimination dispute with law lecturer Asif Qureshi was a matter of "sadness and shame". The university was found guilty of discrimination and Dr Qureshi was paid record damages of Pounds 44,880, for the "apathy and hostility" he had faced.

Now the university faces two sex discrimination disputes, with both cases due to be heard at Manchester Industrial Tribunal within the next few months.

Last month the university failed in a bid to quash action by engineering lecturer Valerie Leavers over alleged "unlawfully discriminatory behaviour".

The university's solicitor tried to get Dr Leavers' complaints ruled "out of time" - too late after the events to be within the tribunal's jurisdiction. But the tribunal chairman ruled that it would be "dangerous to try to form a view, without a full investigation of the evidence".

Dr Leavers is arguing that "there was a continuous course of conduct towards her I motivated by reason of her gender". A date for the full hearing has yet to be set.

The university is facing a second sex discrimination action, by lecturer Joan Watson in the earth science department. Her preliminary hearing, originally planned for April , but postponed due to Dr Watson's ill health, will take place on May 11.

A new training programme in equal opportunities is now under way at the university. All staff on interview panels have to have at least a half-day of training.

登录 或者 注册 以便阅读全文。

请先注册再进行下一步

获得一个月的无限制地在线阅读网站内容。只需注册并完成您的职业简介.

注册是免费的,而且非常简单。一旦成功注册,您可以每个月免费阅读3篇文章。:

  • 获得编辑推荐文章
  • 率先获得泰晤士高等教育世界大学排名相关的新闻
  • 获得职位推荐、筛选工作和保存工作搜索结果
  • 参与读者讨论和公布评论
注册

欢迎反馈

Log in or register to post comments

评论最多

Recent controversy over the future directions of both Stanford and Melbourne university presses have raised questions about the role of in-house publishing arms in a world of commercialisation, impact agendas, alternative facts – and ever-diminishing monograph sales. Anna McKie reports

3 October