Wilkinson v Springwell Engineering Limited - you're never too young to bring a claim

01/09/2008

By Nick Hobden, Partner and Head of Employment.

This is an interesting case for a number of reasons. Firstly, it is an Employment Tribunal decision. This means that the judgment does not carry the weight of a decision made by an Employment Appeal Tribunal or court.

Having said that, as the case is being widely reported, its content is important. Secondly, the case itself concerns an age discrimination claim by an 18 year old employee. One might be forgiven for forgetting that people of this sort of age can be discriminated against. Whilst it may well be the case that the majority of age discrimination claims are filed by those who believe that they have been discriminated against on account of their advanced years, this case serves as a timely reminder that the young can succeed in bringing claims also.

Leanne Wilkinson worked as an office administrator for Springwell. Within a month or so of commencing employment, Springwell expressed concerns regarding Ms Wilkinson's performance. When, despite some efforts by Springwell to provide Ms Wilkinson with additional training, she still failed to make the grade, she was dismissed with immediate effect.

Ms Wilkinson alleged that during the course of the conversation in which she was informed of her dismissal, a manager of the company told her that she was being dismissed because she was too young. As a result, she brought an age discrimination claim against her former employers.

Springwell, understandably, sought to argue that the reason for dismissal was the employee's incapability, rather than her age. However, on closer scrutiny, complaints regarding the accuracy of the employee's work and her productivity did not appear to stack up. The company's case unravelled further when the dismissing manager claimed that he could not remember whether he had mentioned the employee's age when she was dismissed.

Preferring the evidence of the employee, the Employment Tribunal (ET) Judge (they are no longer to be referred to as Chairmen!) concluded that Ms Wilkinson had been directly discriminated against on the grounds of her age. Even in the absence of evidence relating to the express comments made by the dismissing manager, the ET noted that the conduct of the employer demonstrated a stereotypical assumption that age equated to experience. This, in itself, showed a discriminatory train of thought.

Upon succeeding in her claim, Ms Wilkinson was awarded financial compensation for direct discrimination in the sum of £16,000. This included uplift in compensation of 50%, due to the company's failure to comply with the Statutory Dismissal Procedures.

The message in this case is clear. Dismissing younger people in their probationary period or in the first year of employment for so called capability or job mismatch reasons coupled with inappropriate remarks about immaturity or age and non-adherence to the statutory dismissal procedures spells Trouble – Age Discrimination Trouble.