An advertising agency in London is trying to fight its high gender pay gap. As a result, two men fear losing their jobs and are actually fired. They complained of discrimination – and they won.
The successful discrimination lawsuit of the two advertisers began when their agency J Walter Thompson (JWT) found out a few years ago that they were in the final of the “Gender Pay Gap World Cup”, as one of the bosses said at the time. An internal study found that the average wage gap between men and women at the London branch was almost 45 percent. The global company asked one of its creative directors to turn the reputation of JWT, which it called the “boys club for white, straight men who do classic advertising”, inside out.
Should they be “wiped out”?
Basically, it was just one “wrong” word that started the discrimination lawsuit by Chas Bayfield, 52, and Dave Jenner, 50: “obliterate”. It means to extinguish, to destroy, to extinguish. Jo Wallace used it at a conference designed to sharpen the senses of advertisers for diversity and inequality. The creative director explained the aim of the event with the words: “I think we agree that the reputation of JWT – (male), British, white, privileged – must be destroyed.”
These words came across to the two men, also creative directors and white British, as an undisguised threat of resignation – at least that’s what they argued later internally and ultimately in court. Bayfield emailed his boss describing his concern: “I heard there was a meeting calling for white, straight, middle-class creative people to be eliminated. There are many here who do that worries. ” The HR department called a meeting with everyone involved, but that only made the situation worse.
Apparently the concerns of Bayfield and Jenner were understood as a rigorous rejection of the new company policy, which is why the management decided within two days to part with the two men. Labor judge in charge, Mark Emery, wrote in his verdict: The personnel officers were “annoyed from the start and did not want to accept that Mr. Bayfield and Jenner had only voiced their concerns”.
The men were “bullied”
In his verdict, the judge found that communications at the advertising agency were apparently completely out of control. The plaintiffs’ views were regarded as “unacceptable”, which led to poisoning with one another and ultimately to “harassing” treatment. Mark Emery continues: “We come to the conclusion that the company had the sex of the two in mind when they decided to fire them. It would not have happened to a woman in the same position,” said the judge.
One of the plaintiffs, Chas Bayfield, said after the verdict was pronounced: “‘Erasing’ is a tough term. We are concerned with diversity and the visibility of women and minorities, but also with the security of our jobs. But their approach to the gender pay gap is too fighting was limited to looking for an enemy. So they created a mock court and fired us. ” He and his co-plaintiff Dave Jenner are now entitled to compensation, but the company wants to appeal.
Swell: “”, “”,
Jane Stock is a technology author, who has written for 24 Hours World. She writes about the latest in technology news and trends, and is always on the lookout for new and innovative ways to improve his audience’s experience.
