There has been an ongoing debate as to whether post-employment
victimisation is unlawful under the Equality Act 2010. In Onu v
Akwiwu the EAT has held that it is indeed unlawful, departing
from its decision in Rowstock Ltd v Jessemey earlier this
year (which is being appealed to the Court of Appeal).
The claimant in the Onu case was a migrant domestic worker who
left her employment and claimed race discrimination. Her
ex-employer then rang her sister in Nigeria and said Ms Onu had
made claims against him and "would suffer for it". Ms Onu
made a further claim of victimisation.
The EAT recognised that the Equality Act 2010 does not expressly
provide that victimisation of a former employee is unlawful.
Post-termination discrimination and harassment are specifically
covered by section 108 of the Act. There is no such protection for
post-termination victimisation. But in EAT's opinion section
108(7), though rather difficult to interpret, seems to assume
