Huddersfield loses sex bias case

Huddersfield University sexually discriminated against lecturer Penelope Wolff when she was rejected for promotion by an all-male panel of deans who used a selection system that "lacked any rationale, science or objectivity", a tribunal has found.

The Leeds employment tribunal said the deans' meeting in which Dr Wolff's fate was decided was "completely lacking in structure and cohesion" and that the deans' evidence was not convincing. It said the university had equal opportunities procedures, but their application was "sadly lacking".

Lecturers' union Natfhe said the victory sent out a clear warning that impressive-sounding equality procedures were not enough. New sex discrimination laws place an obligation on employers to prove discrimination did not take place, rather than placing the burden of proof on the claimant.

Dr Wolff, a senior lecturer at Huddersfield's school of human and health sciences, claimed there was gender bias when she was passed over for a promotion to a principal lecturer's post in June 2000. The school had put her and a male colleague forward. She was ranked "the number one candidate for the school", the tribunal said.

But an all-male panel of deans rejected Dr Wolff, and selected her male colleague among six men promoted in a total of seven promotions.

The tribunal found a number of problems with the deans' meeting. A change of date meant that no women could attend, and there was no formal policy on the roles of the deans.

The deans had to mark candidates on a scale of 1 to 5. "The scoring system seems... to lack any rationale," said the tribunal.

The university's witnesses were also criticised. "Even allowing for the passage of time, when witnesses who appear as senior members of an academic institution cannot even recognise their own handwriting and identify marking sheets which were completed by them, the value of their evidence must be called into question.

"One witness wrote the letter 'W' against the three female candidates but could not explain why he did so."

The university does not accept the ruling, and is taking further legal advice. Vice-chancellor John Tarrant said: "I am absolutely sure that the process of selecting candidates for promotion was not, and is not, subject to gender bias but it is almost impossibly hard to prove such a negative."