Leeds launches fresh race case appeal
Leeds City Council has launched its fourth appeal in a racial discrimination case concerning an employee of its arm’s-length management organisation.
The council has argued it should be excluded from the case because the claimant is employed by the ALMO. But a court ruled last month that it should be included because of the close relationship between the two bodies.
The claim was brought in 2007 by West North West Homes employee Michael Woodhouse, who alleges he was subjected to repeated incidents of racial discrimination in the workplace from a colleague. His claim has not yet been heard as the council has appealed against its part in the case at every stage.
Previous appeals were rejected by the London Employment Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal. The tribunal found the ALMO was not a ‘mere supplier of goods or incidental services’ to Leeds Council but ‘had taken over the complete management of services’ that Leeds Council remained ‘statutorily obliged to supply’.
Steve Clark, of Unite the Union, which is representing Mr Woodhouse, said: ‘The approach of Leeds City Council is in my view reprehensible. They show no interest in Michael Woodhouse’s right to a fair hearing.
‘Councils up and down the land are watching this case with baited breath because, if justice wins the day, the illusion of the ALMO will go up in smoke.’
The hearing will take place on 23 November.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (6)
claire Sesay | 21/10/2009 9:48 pm
Shame on Leeds City Council - the right to be treated fairly should be embedded into work practice and is the right of every single person, whether they are an employee or a customer. Where someone has a grievance, they should have the right to a fair hearing. Michael has spent the last 6 years trying to be heard. Come on and stop wasting money from the Public Purse and let Michael have his say about how he feels he was treated and if it means that Leeds City Council hold their heads in shame, so be it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ian Fothergill | 21/10/2009 11:03 pm
I had been a BME worker with Leeds City Council Property Sevices Division from 1989 till 2001.For most of the years i had been the only black worker in our department.As a black employee of L.C.C. I was always made to feel comfortable as a friend and colleague.My managers also treated me very well.
However when the Almo's came into existence my department closed down and was moved to Leeds North East Homes where i came across other BME workers which was great and everyone ,black white and asians all got on very well together.During the years i worked at L.N.E.H.I worked very hard and was very reliable.This was noted by my managers.
However. The problems started when we merged with the East Almo.Our managers all either took it as time to retire early or left and went to work elsewhere.When our new managers took over the whole thing felt more like a take over bid rather than a merger. It was their way or the highway.
One of my colleagues a grown man .(not a BME worker).Was put to sit with his desk and chair outside a managers glass fronted office .(like a school child outside the headmasters office).Because they said he talked too much.(Is this any way to treat an adult )?
I went on stress leave and when i returned i was disciplined.They weren't interested in what had caused the stress.My Union Rep fought my case for me, but because the book atopped with them they did as they pleased with me.A year later i was sacked over a personal matter.I appealed ,again with a union official in front of a panel.My managers gave evidence against me to panel and just told barefaced lies.In the end the panel decided to give me my job back but my managers held an emergency meeting and over turned the panels decision to re instate me.
Another thing with these Almo's is that they claim to be totally independent from Leeds City Council.Yet our payslips always said the Almo's were a company totally owned by Leeds City Council.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Human Rights | 22/10/2009 2:45 am
It appears to me that Leeds City Council's house is going up in smoke. The Council is trying unfair tactics to escape from the behaviors of a majority employee and deny any responsibility from the system as a whole. Individuals do not wake-up in the morning and decide they are going to pull the race card when it suits them. Racism in such institution are historically systemic. In part, this is due to individuals at various levels trying to protect their position from employees of color who are intelligent, and can do their job just as efficiently as their counterparts. I am proud of Michael Woodhouse for his courage to take on such a system that has continuously tried to oppress minorities in the workplace. Micheal is the voice of many and now it is time from him to be heard!!!!!!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
NIA | 23/10/2009 1:38 pm
I fully empathise with Mr Woodhouse whilst commending his tenacity to fight on for his basic right, despite the many adversities he has had to contend with over the last 6 years. His case is a sad but accurate reflection of the current state racism within the UK today.
Racism is very much alive and kicking and not just within the BNP faternity but from all sections of UK society. Our local authorities are no exceptions either.
This is why I believe Mr Michael Woodhouse's determination and resolve to suceed in his battle for justice should be highlighted at the highest level. I imagine Leeds City Council in its arrogance would have by now expected Mr Woodhouse to backdown quietly or take the money and run. Unfortunately, for them this has not been the case.
I for one salute Mr Woodhouse and pray God will grant him strength and grace to fight on. Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Paul Bogle etc would have been proud of you. He has set a new the bench mark for others (ordinary people) to aim for and fight against all injustices which often rears its ugly head and is ubiquitous in UK society.
Win or lose , Mr Woodhouse has demonstrated courage goes beyond the useless policies and procedures which the white collar racist often hide behind and hopefully his actions will inspire others to take an active stance against all forms of racism and discrimination in general. God Bless.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Inspired | 27/10/2009 1:28 pm
Its questionable as to the year that we are in. This should not be hapening in 2009. What kind of world are we in where it is acceptable to discriminate and be skill a man based on his race. Woodhouse has been picked on in his place of work, and the man that did it has got away with it scott free. The organisation has felt it acceptable to make the matter worse! Im sure that an apology from the man that abusedWoodhouse should have been enough but the council lied to protect him...why? are they institutionally racist or do they just not care about the welfare for their enployees? Not only have they covered for evil and not spoken out against racism, they did nothing meaning that this man has suuffered. In their inaction, they have shown that they do not care about the rights of black people in the workforce. As if that wasnt bad enough, they have promoted racism by fighting Woodhouse every step of the way. How many judges do they really need to say that they are accountable before LCC stands up to be counted. This situation is wrong, and i for one would like to know why it is taking so long and also how a council can spend this much money to defend racism. There is no use denying it because that it is in control of the ALMO because im sure that the laws on vaicarious responsibility will prevale.
Woodhouse, if you read this, carry on the fight! you are my black inspiration and you must continue to fight, not only for you but for others after you.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jayne Smith | 23/11/2009 1:36 pm
I am a LCC tenant and have known Michael for some years. We have had our disagreements, but from my perspective Michael is very professional always in his job, and is also extremely polite when dealing with tenants.
As I say we have had our disagreements over the years - however when I read what Michael had endured from a member of staff at LCC I was disgusted! And now, as always LCC are attempting to pass the buck to one of It's "ALMO's" so as to not give itself a "bad name".
Well LCC, if you're reading this - It's simple - Each and every ALMO makes up the whole entirety of LCC. A bit like a parent who has 10 children and sends each child to different schools - that doesn't mean they're not all still part of that family!!!
I'm not going to say who I am for personal reasons - but one fine example of LCC passing It's responsibility is this; I sent correspondence to LCC - who then passed it on to an ALMO!!! Oh but I thought you were not the same authority? So why did you not answer my correspondence directly huh?
LCC and It's ALMO's are ALL one in the same - they're also bullies of the highest order! Bullies to their tenants, and bullies to their employees!!!
Michael - if you happen to be reading this, do not back down, keep fighting - and as the saying goes "don't let the b******s grind you down" Fight, fight hard, and you will win! Show those bullying scaremongers up for what they are! Good luck!
P.S. Reading some of the posts on here by people who have been employed by LCC/ALMO's has shocked me to the core! If this is how they quite obviously treat their employees regularly, then there is no hope for us tenants - shame on you LCC!!!!!!!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment