Now police recruits rejected for being colourblind sue for sex discrimination

(This article appeared in the Scottish Daily Mail on Wednesday August 27 2008)

By Jim McBeth
and Fiona Davidson

A recruit rejected by Scotland's largest police force because he is colour-blind is claiming to be a victim of indirect sex discrimination.

Robin Dixon had been accepted by Strathclyde Police but was turned down after the force discovered he suffers from a vision abnormality that prevents him from differentiating shades of green.

This form of colour blindness is usually found only in men.

Mr Dixon, 26, of East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, is the second man to be allowed to fight his case at an employment tribunal.

He and 29-year-old Graeme McCullie, of Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, had both lost disability discrimination cases actions against Strathclyde Police.

However, a tribunal in Glasgow yesterday ruled that, 'in the interests of justice and equity', Mr Dixon can join Mr McCullie in arguing a case based on sex discrimination.

The decision follows a landmark case in England, where a similar employment tribunal ruled that a police officer, relegated to desk duties after his superiors discovered his colourblindness, had been a subject of indirect sex dicrimination.

Mr Dixon, who is now working in a DIY superstore in Dublin, said he was delighted.

He added: "This is wonderful news. I feel I am on the last lap to some kind of justice.

"It was dreadful to be accepted in to the force, then told my life-long ambition was not to be. In spite of my colour blindness, I could have joined any force other than Strathclyde which has, I understand, rejected 16 candidates like me in recent years."

At the disability discrimination hearings, senior Strathclyde officers admitted that Mr Dixon and Mr McCullie were good applicants but claimed their colour blindness raised health and safety issues for the public and other officers.

After they lost their cases, the two men learned of the English tribunal's ruling and that their affliction was almost wholly confined to men. Last month they asked leave of the Glasgow tribunal to present a new case.

At the hearing, Strathclyde Police objected, claiming that as the complaint had not been presented within three months of the alleged discriminatory actm it was time-barred.

But tribunal chairman Michael MacMillan yesterday over-ruled the force's objection and allowed the two cases to proceed. They are expected to be heard towards the end of this year.

Mr Dixon, who was rejected by Strathclyde Police in Novemeber 2005, added: "It has been a long time but I'm glad we can fight on.

"I was told I would make a good police constable but they said there were concerns for the health and safety of other officers and the public.

"There were also, they claimed, concerns as to the reliability and credibility of evidence, which would mean my ability to distinguish colours being called into question.

"But the fact is that my form of red-green colour blindness is acceptable under the Police Scotland Regulations 2004 and I could join any other force.

"I was, in fact, invited to join Lothian & Borders but I felt it would be inappropriate while I was embroiled in thsi action against Strathclyde Police which continues to apply its own rules on the matter. I'm not certain what the future holds. I will have to wait on the outcome of the case. But at some point I would be delighted if I could wear a police uniform. It has always been my ambition."

Mr McCullie, who is working as a heating engineer, said: "I'm desperate to get this sorted out . If we are successful I would be delighted to again consider trying to become a policeman."

A spokesman for the Equality and Human Rights Commission Scotland said: "The onus will be on the police force to show that it was trying to achieve a legitimate aim and the action it took was proportionate."

A spokesman for Strathclyde Police said: 'With regard to Mr Dixon's claim to an employment tribunal, this has passed a time-bar argument and will, together with Mr McCillie's case, proceed to the next stage.'

Editor's Notes

1. During his disability discrimination claim Mr Dixon was never afforded the opportunity to have his case heard, Strathclyde Police having employed legal technical strategies which resulted in the Tribunal determining that Mr Dixon's application had been submitted a few days late.
2. Mr McCullie has never presented an application under disability discrimination.

Colour blind claim is pie in the sky

The following letter was "Comment of the day" in the Evening Times "Your View" on Saturday August 30 2008:-

Your story (August 27) about graduate Robin Dixon whose application to join the police was rejected because he was colour blind, said he had lost a disability discrimination claim against Strathclyde Police.

And yet he has now won the right to claim sex discrimination on the grounds that colour-blindness affects more men than women.

Who is this man going to claim against? Surely not his parents for passing on a hereditary gene? No, he's going to sue the police, saying it's their fault.

What is the world coming to when claims like this are even given the time of day.

Some jobs, including the police, have stringent medical conditions applied to them because of the work involved.

Find something else to do with your time and our money, Mr Dixon. Police have more important matters to deal with.

Robert Borthwick

Arden

The following response has been submitted by AbsolutelyPC to "Your View" for their consideration.

Dear Sir,

Robert Borthwick raises important points in your "Comment of the Day" letter of 30th August.

He is quite correct in emphasising that, for police recruitment, stringent conditions apply to issues such as medical fitness and eyesight standards. So important are these issues that they are part of Police Regulations laid down by the Scottish Government - and these Regulations state that Mr Dixon and Mr McCullie are both fit to perform the work of an operational police constable.

It must be a matter of great concern to the public served by Strathclyde Police that this force, which exists to uphold the law, is willing, so blatantly and deliberately, to flaunt their own Regulations.

Mr Borthwick also, quite appropriately, raises the question of the use of "our" money. It must be reasonable to ask why Strathclyde Police are so readily willing to use and to risk public money, in efforts designed to block the reasonable course of Justice and Human Rights, when all they needed to do was follow their own Regulations.

The risk to the public purse is not limited to Mr Dixon and Mr McCullie. There are at least 14 others who could be entitled to bring similar actions, some of whom may now be serving police officers with other forces, and every future rejection for the same reasons could result in a future risk to the public purse.

It is a pity that Mr Dixon was never afforded the opportunity to have his claim of Disability heard, since there is an ongoing need to clarify the status of colour vision as a disability. This is especially so when, as in this case, employers place unjustifiable obstacles in a persons way to employment.

What is absolutely clear is that there continues to exist within Strathclyde Police, ignorance and outdated attitudes towards certain issues, which brings into question their claims to be an employer of equal opportunity.

In understanding the issue of colour vision, it is important to understand that neither Mr Dixon nor Mr McCullie are blind. Neither are they unable to see and identify colours. They may,indeed, be able to see some colour that other cannot see. They may also be able to see colour in some situations where "normal" vision is limited.

In most situations colour vision "abnormality" makes no difference to a persons life or capability. In some situations it can be an asset.

While their colour perception may be slightly different from the majority, it is similar to a significant minority of the population. Just because they are different is no reason for anyone to discriminate against them - that is the simple issue in the cases these two men have taken to Tribunal.

yours

AbsolutelyPC

http://politically-correct.blogspot.com/

Editors Note
Mr Dixon's claim of Disability Discrimination was never heard at an Employment Tribunal due to the employment of legal technicalities by Strathclyde Police which resulted in a determination that the claim had been submitted a few days late.