Glasgow City Council v McNab UKEATS/0037/06/MT; [2007] IRLR 476 | Practical Law

Glasgow City Council v McNab UKEATS/0037/06/MT; [2007] IRLR 476 | Practical Law

In Glasgow City Council v McNab the EAT upheld a tribunal's decision that an atheist teacher employed by a Catholic school maintained by the Council had suffered direct discrimination under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 when he was refused an interview for the post of Principal Teacher of Pastoral Care. The tribunal had been entitled to conclude that the post was not on the list of posts for which the Roman Catholic Church required a teacher to be Catholic (as set out in a 1991 agreement between the Council and the Church) and therefore the Council should not have assumed that the Church would not have approved the appointment. The EAT also upheld the tribunal's finding that there was no genuine occupational requirement (GOR). In particular, it held that a local authority has no religious ethos and therefore cannot take advantage of the GOR in regulation 7(3), even in respect of employment in a religious school.

Glasgow City Council v McNab UKEATS/0037/06/MT; [2007] IRLR 476

Practical Law Resource ID 0-375-9094 (Approx. 2 pages)

Glasgow City Council v McNab UKEATS/0037/06/MT; [2007] IRLR 476

Published on 17 Jan 2007England, Scotland, Wales
In Glasgow City Council v McNab the EAT upheld a tribunal's decision that an atheist teacher employed by a Catholic school maintained by the Council had suffered direct discrimination under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003 when he was refused an interview for the post of Principal Teacher of Pastoral Care. The tribunal had been entitled to conclude that the post was not on the list of posts for which the Roman Catholic Church required a teacher to be Catholic (as set out in a 1991 agreement between the Council and the Church) and therefore the Council should not have assumed that the Church would not have approved the appointment. The EAT also upheld the tribunal's finding that there was no genuine occupational requirement (GOR). In particular, it held that a local authority has no religious ethos and therefore cannot take advantage of the GOR in regulation 7(3), even in respect of employment in a religious school.