by Poshgill » Fri Nov 23, 2012 8:36 am
The McCammon case is quite interesting from an employment legislation point of view. The court found in favour of McCammon, not because he was discriminated against, but because the club could not prove he WAS'NT discriminated against. It is an important distinction. Of course, the media in this country put their own incorrect spin on it and that is why it is percieved that we are a racist club (when obviously we are not).
Yet again, it was Scally that failed miserably. Any employer has a duty to investigate allegations that are made (be it race, disability, age or if the allegation is about harrasment or bullying). Once the investigation is conducted properly with appropriate records kept, then there is no way it would go to an Employment Tribunal. (unless it was found that McCammon HAD been the victim of discrimination.)
In a similar way, I used to work with an Asian train driver. He reported several people over the course of a few years for race discrimination. On the 3rd time of his reporting and with no evidence found to support his claim, I had great delight in disciplining him for malicious reporting. He appealed my decision as high as he could (the Union refusing to back him as I'd kept proper records of interviews etc) and in the end he became a model employee.