Discrimination Claim after Scrapped Period Dignity Officer Role

Julie Sabba, an associate in MLP’s employment team, considers a recent news report, focusing on the withdrawal of the controversial role of period dignity officer by a Scottish working group.

The period dignity officer role was axed last month, after a heated public debate, with many critics arguing that the role should have gone to a woman.  A spokesperson on behalf of the working group, which had initiated the role, stated that it had been scrapped after ‘threats and abuse’ targeted at staff.

Jason Grant, the male appointed to the role has now made it known that he intends to rely on the Equality Act 2010 to raise a claim of discrimination, based on the fact that he lost the opportunity to undertake the role because he is a man.

His role – created to ensure the legal right to free period products in public places – was described as the first of its kind in Scotland.  Mr Grant had been expected to lead a campaign across schools, colleges and communities in Tayside to raise awareness of Scotland’s law on period products and ensure that funding was allocated appropriately.

The Equality Act 2010 gives protection from discrimination on the grounds of protected characteristics, including sex and gender.

The legal fall-out surrounding the role highlights to employers the importance of having a clear rationale when providing a job specification.  Similarly, where certain roles may be more or less suited to men or women (or, conversely, where that consideration is irrelevant) employers should be able to justify the thought process in that decision, should it be challenged.

If you would like advice from the Employment team at MLP Law in respect of any of the issues raised here or more generally, please do not hesitate to get in touch on 0161 926 9969 or employment@mlplaw.co.uk, or follow us on Twitter @HRHeroUK.