News: Making Pubs Less Attractive to Gay Customers Amounts to Discrimination
(Press Article)- Date: 17/01/2011
- Source: Poppleston Allen
- Author/Solicitor: Nick Arron
A recent case held by the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) demonstrates the tension between licensees targeting specific sectors of the market and discrimination law implemented to ensure equality. The EAT in its decision in Lisboa vs Real Pub Limited held that a policy of making a pub less attractive to gay customers constituted direct discrimination against a gay employee, of the pub company, who was not comfortable with implementing such a policy. The policy amounted to a breach of the employment contract and entitled the employee to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
The case involved the Coleherne Pub, a well known gay pub in London which was failing. The premises were known for drug dealers and prostitution. Real Pubs purchased the Coleherne and attempted to re-brand it as a gastro pub. In order to do this they sought to make the pub less attractive to the gay community. The claimant argued that being put under pressure to co-operate with the policy of making the pub less welcome to gay customers amounted to discrimination.
The implementation of the pub company's policy included suggesting that a board should be put outside the pub saying 'this is not a gay club'. Encouraging staff to place customers who did not appear to be gay in prominent places so that they could be seen from outside the pub; the sex balance amongst staff members changed from being one dominated by men to one which was more even.
There was also evidence given reading emails which stated that they are no longer an exclusively gay pub, use of terms such as 'queens' and remarks such as 'Charles is gay but another kind of gay' in reference to the claimant 'walked too camp'.
In the first hearing the employment tribunal found that their remarks constituted direct discrimination, they said that the policy of repositioning the pub was lawful and therefore the claimant was not discriminated against. They rejected the constructive dismissal claim.
Mr Lisboa appealed to the EAT. The tribunal concluded that gay customers were 'plainly unarguably' treated less favourably on grounds of their sexual orientation and it therefore followed that Mr Lisboa's claims should succeed. Whilst the policy of embracing diversity and welcoming it was laudable, discriminating against gay customers and staff was not. They found that Mr Lisboa had been constructively dismissed.
Many pubs seek to appeal to a particular section of the community. The difficulty arises when this is at the expense of a separate section of society as clearly was the case in this matter. A sign is more subtle and without the 'this pub is not gay' sign the case may have been decided differently.
For more information please contact Nick Arron
