1.6. Listening 11. Discrimination. The parkhirst talkabout.

Listen to the discussion of the Sex Discrimination Act, prepare three questions to each participant, act out the interview in pairs.

In groups, choose any entry. Do the figures surprise you? Discuss your views with other groups.

Men and Women: various comparisons – Great Britain
	Men	Women
Life expectancy (years) Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours Percentage of all Employed work force Unemployed Trade Unionists Members of Parliament Members of House of Lords Civil Servants Drug Addicts Prison Population Bank Managers Directors Solicitors University Graduates University Students Credit Card Holders	77.2 £124.50 45 58 64.5 71 97 96 60 66 97 99 97 93 63 65 80	81.6 £78.80 30 42 35.5 29 3 4 40 34 3 1 3 7 37 35 20

Source: The Guinness Pocket of Facts.

Reading 3. A SEX DISCRIMINATION CASE

In the UK, the law provides for sex-discrimination cases to be brought before an employment tribunal, which has the power to award compensation to the claimant. If the tribunal decides that the law has been broken, it can award compensation for financial loss, as well as for injury to feelings or health, which has been suffered as a result of the discriminatory treatment. Furthermore, a tribunal may also award aggravated damages if injury to feelings has been made worse by the manner in which the discrimination has been carried out. In certain circumstances, the tribunal may even order exemplary damages in order to punish the respondent.

The following article provides information about the outcome of a case heard by an employment tribunal.

Ex. 1. Quickly scan the article and decide which is the most appropriate headline.

1. LAWYERS FINED BY TRIBUNAL FOR DISCRIMINATORY BEHAVIOUR

2. HIGH AWARD OF DAMAGES IN DISCRIMINATION CASE

3. TRIBUNAL HEARS CONTROVERSIAL DISMISSAL CASE

Ex. 2. Read through the article more carefully and answer the questions below.

Solicitors are not immune from employment law cases being brought against them; in what is being heralded as a landmark case, a tribunal has awarded two female former employees of the London firm Sinclair, Roche and Temperley awards totaling £900,000. The employees successfully claimed that they were victims of sex discrimination and, in particular, that the discriminatory culture pervading the firm prevented women from becoming senior equity partners.

An interesting feature of the case is that the tribunal found that the way in which a partner at the firm behaved during the litigation was malicious and designed to discredit one of the applicants without having any real, foundation. In consequence, the tribunal imposed £3,000 extra aggravated damages. Such awards encourage caution in the way in which proceedings are defended.

1. Who do you think the text was written for?

2. What was the case about? Who were the claimants, and who were the defendants?

3. What is a 'landmark case'?

4. According to the claimants, what prevented them from becoming senior partners at their firm?

5. Why were extra damages imposed on the defendants?

6. What does the text say about the effect that the award of extra-aggravated damages would likely have on future proceedings of this kind?

7. Explain what you think is meant by a discriminatory culture at a law firm.

Listening 12. LIABILITY RISKS

Lawyers often advise their clients how to avoid claims arising from work-related disputes, such as the one discussed in reading 3, by informing them of potential risks.

In the following interview, a lawyer (Ms Brewer) tells her clients (Mr. and Ms Howard), who are business owners and employers, about the liability risk associated with drug testing in the workplace.

Ex. 3. Listen to the interview and decide whether these statements are true or false.

1. Mr. Howard says that the drug problem at his company is affecting business.

2. Ms. Brewer informs her clients that the issue of employee drug testing is an unsettled area of the law.

3. If they dismiss a worker on the basis of a drug test that reveals the worker has taken drugs, Mr. and Mrs. Howard risk being sued for infringing employees' rights.

4. Ms. Brewer points out that under certain circumstances, the courts have decided that employers were entitled to dismiss an employee for work related drug use.

5. Ms. Brewer recommends laying off the workers suspected of consuming illegal drugs in the workplace.

Speaking. AGREEING AND DISAGREEING

Ex. 4. Using the phrases for agreeing and disagreeing presented above, discuss these statements with a partner.

1. Sex discrimination cases will decline as women are now enjoying more equality in the workplace.

2. Drug testing in the workplace is an infringement of an individual's right to privacy, a right which the courts should continue to protect.

3. It is an employer's responsibility to help its employees overcome problems with addiction or substance abuse.

4. Women should be able to resume their careers where they left off after taking time off to bring up a family.

Ex. 5. The article is divided into three parts. Read the three headings. Which of the three sections do you think primarily contains opinions and attitudes?

Ex. 6. Look at the first section of the text. Underline the explanation of how employment tribunals work, as well as the four adjectives describing the new arbitration scheme.

Ex. 7. Read the whole text. Whose opinions of the arbitration procedure are reported? Why does the writer describe the introduction of the new scheme as ironic?