Tribunals vs Governments

[Chambertin]

Hi there, my first post. I have a few questions I would like to pose to see if anyone can offer me advice/straighten out my thinking.

I as a Civil Servant wish to take the Government department I work for to an ET but part of my claim relates to harassing and discriminatory policies and practices in place across the Civil Service which contravene the PSED and so I would like to include the Cabinet Office as the Corporate Headquarters of the Home Civil Service as a respondent. However they are saying that because I am not employed by them that they should be stricken out.

I've looked on the ET decisions page and found the "Mr Coombes v Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency R1_The Cabinet Office R2" decision which permitted someone else to bring a claim against the Cabinet Office despite them not being employed by them, justified by the Cabinet Offices acceptance that any finding against the first respondent would be binding on them also.

This is the case with my complaints - that any finding against the first respondent would be binding on the entire Civil Service except the Cabinet Office are resisting their inclusion as a Respondent in my case.

Are there any other justifications I can use as to why the second respondent should remain part of my claim? I was going to reference Schedule 1 Para 1 (5)a which infers that a claimant doesn't need to be employed by the respondent but I realised I was looking at the legislation from 2004 and that now seems to be done away with.

Anyway, thanks in advance for any help.

[Chambertin]

Hi there, second post.

Can I pick the brains of those more knowledgeable to me please for a steer/clarification on my understanding please?

Is an employee able to bring a claim against their employer if their employer adopts practices and policies which defame and smear people by protected characteristics but which have not targeted me as an individual?

For example, if my employer or a influential person within my business used the media/intranet to address LGBT at large and said to them that Muslims are their enemies could I, as a Muslim, bring a complaint even though I have not been targeted as an individual but as part of a group who share a protected characteristic?

This seems intuitive that I ought to be able. But is it permissible by law?

If an LGBT 'ally' uses a medium which is accessible to all in order to address a particular group concerning his allyship but in so doing casually mentions that another group of given protected characteristics are a cause of the first groups problems then is that something which can be complained about?

I would guess harassment as it is creating an offensive environment based on protected characteristics but its not being directed at me specifically.

Any thoughts?

[atticus]

ULA can you please look at this user's posts when you have a chance. He has also started another thread.

[ULA]

Hi Chambertin is seems to be a related post to the other thread you have started?

If so I am going to merge the threads as it is more helpful for those of us advising to be dealing with one thread on a related subject not multiple.

[Chambertin]

Hi Chambertin is seems to be a related post to the other thread you have started?

If so I am going to merge the threads as it is more helpful for those of us advising to be dealing with one thread on a related subject not multiple.

Hi yes it is - sorry, I didn't mean to be a spammy nause or anything. Yes all concern the same matters. Thanks,