Employment Law Cases

Gareddu v London Underground

An employer did not indirectly discriminate (on the grounds of religion or belief) against one of its employees when it refused him permission to take five weeks’ holiday to attend religious festivals with his family.

Mr Gareddu is a Roman Catholic from Sardinia. For four years, his employer had given him permission to take five consecutive week’s leave to attend Sardinian-based religious festivals with his family.

In 2013, a new line manager advised Mr Gareddu that he would not be granted more than 15 consecutive days of holiday during the school summer holidays (on the basis that company policy was that only two weeks’ holiday could be taken in one go). However, the line manager did allow Mr Gareddu to take five weeks’ holiday in 2014 because he’d already made the arrangements. The line manager made it clear that this would be the last time this length of leave would be granted. After an unsuccessful grievance, Mr Gareddu brought a claim of indirect religious discrimination. He contended that he needed five weeks off as there were several religious festivals in Sardinia (17 specifically) that he had to, and did, attend, which were dear to him from childhood and related to specific saints.

Mr Gareddu’s claim failed, both in tribunal and at the EAT. Indirect discrimination cases nearly always hinge of the justification element – but here that wasn’t even considered. Why? Because the tribunal, while accepting that participation in religious festivals might constitute a manifestation of religious beliefs, held that Mr Gareddu’s claim of having to be there for five weeks to attend 17 specific festivals simply wasn’t made in good faith as the real reason for wanting to have five weeks off was to spend time with his family.

Mr Gareddu initially claimed he attended the same 17 festivals each year as they were dear to him and of deeply religious significance. It later transpired he had only attended nine festivals in 2013 and had not attended any festivals in 2014 and 2015 due to injury. Additionally, he couldn’t specify which of the festivals he was planning to attend, indicating this would be decided on with his family. The Tribunal said the asserted reason for wanting five weeks off, namely to attend religious festivals, was not true and the real reason was to spend time with his extended family in Sardinia.

The EAT could find nothing wrong with the tribunal’s decision. The tribunal did not say that Mr Gareddu’s religious belief was not genuine; merely that the true or genuine reason for wanting a five-week period was not his religious beliefs or their manifestation but was his wish to be with his family.

Link to judgment: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2016/0086_16_1512.html

Comment

Such cases are always fact-specific – and this case might be considered at the extreme end in terms of time off requested. If an employee requests holiday for genuine religious beliefs it is likely to amount to discrimination if declined for a reason which cannot be objectively justified. One reason might be that you employ many employees who all follow the same religion and all want that time off and so you will have to say no to some and not others. Always treat such requests on a case-by-case basis and never take a blanket approach.

One issue which didn’t crop up here is custom and practice and implied terms. It might have been argued that Mr Gareddu’s employer, by allowing him to take five consecutive weeks’ holiday each year from 2009 up until 2014, had actually created an implied term into his contract that he could take those same five weeks each and every year. To avoid terms being implied, make sure there is an express term in the employment contract as to the maximum length of holiday an employee can take.