An employment judge has ruled that bosses unfairly got “rid” of the two male workers because it “immediately assisted the gender pay gap issue”.
Two male employees have successfully won a sex discrimination claim due to their employers’ poor gender pay gap.
The two creative directors worked for London advertising agency JWT, a business that had set out on a diversity drive after a report revealed a serious lack of female representation, reported Metro.
As part of this diversity drive, the organisation hired Jo Wallace to take on the role of creative director, where she vowed to “obliterate” its ‘Mad Men’ reputation of being full of straight, white men.
During a diversity conference, she previously said: “One thing we all agree on is that the reputation JWT once earnt – as being full of white, British, privileged (men) – has to be obliterated.”
Wallace stated that the company also had a ‘Knightsbridge Boys Club’ reputation.
The two employees, Chas Bayfield and Dave Jenner, shared that they expressed concerns about their job security, however bosses thought that they were “challenging” the diversity drive, and as a result made them redundant.
Wunderman Thompson, who merged with JWT, were sued for sex discrimination. A judge went on to rule that the bosses at the firm unfairly got “rid” of them because it “immediately assisted the gender pay gap issue”.
Causing controversy
After Wallace spoke at the conference in 2018 alongside executive creative director Lucas Peon, it caused controversy among staff, as she stated that “white, British, privileged, straight men creating traditional, above the line advertising” needed to be abolished.
This prompted Bayfield to send an email to a boss, which read: “I found out recently JWT did a talk off site where it vowed to obliterate white, middle-class straight people from its creative department. There are a lot of very worried people down here.”
Emma Hoyle, the firm’s HR director and Peon went on to call a meeting with Bayfield and Jenner to discuss their concerns over job safety.
While the two employees stated that they believe women and minorities should have a fair chance, they were accused of challenging the organisation’s diversity drive.
The treatment they received as a result was branded as “victimisation” by employment judge Mark Emery at the London Central tribunal.
“We considered that a significant factor in (the company’s bosses) minds at this time was the gender pay gap issue, and that a reason for dismissing Mr Bayfield and Mr Jenner was there would be an impact, both in terms of the figures, and by the prospect of having senior positions opening which could be filled by women.,” the judge added.
Tackling the gender pay gap
Much has been done to stamp out the gender pay gap, for example every year businesses with more than 250 employees must take part in the gender pay gap reporting, to help highlight any pay disparities between male and female colleagues.
Meanwhile, various studies have been undertaken to show pay inequalities in various sectors to help increase more equal pay among women and minority employees in particular.
However, this incident involving Bayfield and Jenner demonstrates that male colleagues may also be discriminated against when it comes to fair pay.
Karen Holden, CEO of A City Law Firm, echoes this as she told Reward Strategy: “Whilst focus is usually on discrimination against women we must remember the Equality Act is about equal treatment. The Equality Act 2010 says you must not be discriminated against because ‘you are (or are not) a particular sex’.
"This means that salaries and benefits must be fair for all genders across the board. As such being male should certainly not attract any form of discrimination positive or in this case unfavourable.
“If we want to fight inequality we must focus on all the gaps.”