Police officials tried to justify the move saying it fell under a diversity scheme that ‘did not exist at the time’ (Picture: Katielee Arrowsmith/SWNS)
Three white police officers who were passed over for promotion because of their race have won a discrimination claim.
A Thames Valley Police boss ordered officials to diversify the force’s senior staff by appointing an ‘Asian’ sergeant to the rank of detective inspector.
Yet by doing so, hiring managers did not hold a competitive process – and three cops with decades of experience between them were all blocked from applying.
Detective Inspector Phillip Turner-Robson, Inspector Graham Horton and Kirsteen Bishop, a custody inspector, brought employment tribunal proceedings against Thames Valley Police saying they were disadvantaged for being ‘white British’, a tribunal was told.
In August 2022, officials discussed putting up a job advert for a detective inspector in the regional force’s ‘priority crime team’ at Aylesbury.
Catching wind of this, Turner-Robson said he intended to apply for the job that same day, the Norwich tribunal heard. The role was not advertised to staff.
Sgt Sidhu, whose forename was not provided, was made detective inspector by Superintendent Emma Baillie in September 2022.
The three claimants were described in the tribunal as ‘white British’ (Picture: Greg Blatchford/REX/Shutterstock)
Deputy Chief Constable Jason Hogg had ordered Baillie to do so, with the tribunal saying the pair ‘jumped the gun’.
Sidhu had not yet been promoted to inspector – the role below detective inspector.
Turner-Robson, Horton and Bishop had been working for Thames Valley Police for between 19 and 26 years.
To justify the move, Baillie claimed the promotion was made under a ‘BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic) Progression Programme’ which ‘did not exist at the time’.
Employment Judge Robin Postle said the decision ‘clearly constituted positive discrimination’ and was made ‘without thinking it through’.
‘Superintendent Baillie and no doubt the deputy chief constable had been warned of the risk of operating such a policy,’ the tribunal said in its July decision published yesterday.
Fast-tracking Sidhu ‘without undertaking any competitive exercise did constitute positive discrimination in that it went beyond mere encouragement, disadvantaging those officers who did not share Sergeant Sidhu’s protected characteristic of race and who were denied the opportunity to apply for the role’.
‘It was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim,’ the decision continued.
‘Clearly, the claimants were not afforded the opportunity to apply for and be considered for and be appointed to the Detective Inspector role.
‘Furthermore, the claimants were treated less favourably than Sergeant Sidhu in that they were simply not afforded the opportunity to apply for the role having expressed interest in doing so.’
Judge Postle said the force discriminated against the three officers by reason of the protected characteristic of race.
Ballie’s aim, she added, was ‘on “making it work”, rather than carrying out a balancing exercise’.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.