This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/aug/19/employment-tribunal-repeats-itself

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
The employment tribunal that repeats itself Hideously diverse Britain: The employment tribunal that repeats itself
(8 days later)
Greg Lewis blinks slowly as the man in a suit, an employment tribunal judge, asks the questions that may shape his life from this point on. They are detailed, forensic, but taken together there is a clear direction of travel. Did Lewis lose his chance to be the head chef at New College, Oxford – and subsequently his career – because he didn't cut the mustard? Or was it, as he contended, because he faced discrimination? On the right side of the airy room, Lewis and his legal representative Tracy truly believe that someone just couldn't countenance his rise to a landmark position. The respondents and their barrister, seated opposite in the horseshoe, contend that while the whole thing is very sad, Lewis has just got the wrong end of the stick. Only one of the two sides can win, because this is an adversarial process and at some point someone has to make a decision. That's why the process has to be fair.Greg Lewis blinks slowly as the man in a suit, an employment tribunal judge, asks the questions that may shape his life from this point on. They are detailed, forensic, but taken together there is a clear direction of travel. Did Lewis lose his chance to be the head chef at New College, Oxford – and subsequently his career – because he didn't cut the mustard? Or was it, as he contended, because he faced discrimination? On the right side of the airy room, Lewis and his legal representative Tracy truly believe that someone just couldn't countenance his rise to a landmark position. The respondents and their barrister, seated opposite in the horseshoe, contend that while the whole thing is very sad, Lewis has just got the wrong end of the stick. Only one of the two sides can win, because this is an adversarial process and at some point someone has to make a decision. That's why the process has to be fair.
If everyone present looks wearied, it is because most have been here before. The first batch of these hearings began two years ago. On that occasion Lewis lost his claim and the whole thing seemed to be over. But it wasn't over. Lewis claimed, among other things, that New College stereotyped him, implying that he was "stupid" and "lazy". It's a lingering stereotype applied to black people, he argued. Is it? I've never heard that stereotype, said the judge, provoking incredulity. "They may have a more relaxed approach to life than other ethnic groups," he said in his judgment, making a bad situation worse. Lewis appealed. He won another hearing. That's why it's Groundhog Day in Reading.If everyone present looks wearied, it is because most have been here before. The first batch of these hearings began two years ago. On that occasion Lewis lost his claim and the whole thing seemed to be over. But it wasn't over. Lewis claimed, among other things, that New College stereotyped him, implying that he was "stupid" and "lazy". It's a lingering stereotype applied to black people, he argued. Is it? I've never heard that stereotype, said the judge, provoking incredulity. "They may have a more relaxed approach to life than other ethnic groups," he said in his judgment, making a bad situation worse. Lewis appealed. He won another hearing. That's why it's Groundhog Day in Reading.
Now I don't know Lewis. I didn't sit through enough of his case to pronounce definitively. I don't have to. That's why we have tribunals. In this case, Lewis lost, New College won hands-down. But this system only works when everyone believes the playing field is level. Ah you say; the system did work because he appealed and got a second hearing. Indeed he did. But the process started two years ago. Two awful years for him, two awful years for those accused. Dragged out by an idiocy. And what of the first judge? Well, a complaint has been sent to the Office for Judicial Complaints. Let's see how "relaxed" is the approach towards him.Now I don't know Lewis. I didn't sit through enough of his case to pronounce definitively. I don't have to. That's why we have tribunals. In this case, Lewis lost, New College won hands-down. But this system only works when everyone believes the playing field is level. Ah you say; the system did work because he appealed and got a second hearing. Indeed he did. But the process started two years ago. Two awful years for him, two awful years for those accused. Dragged out by an idiocy. And what of the first judge? Well, a complaint has been sent to the Office for Judicial Complaints. Let's see how "relaxed" is the approach towards him.