In a landmark ruling, the practice of caste discrimination – a hidden but widespread phenomenon within Britain’s 4.5-million strong Asian community – was identified as a violation of Britain’s Equalities Act 2010.
An employment tribunal ordered that Permila Tirkey, 39, an Adivasi from Bihar who was held in near-bondage by her employers for a period of four-and-a-half years be awarded her unpaid wages. He ordered that Pooja and Ajay Chandhok from Milton Keynes, who paid Ms. Tirkey 11p an hour for an 18-hour workday, pay her £184,000 in unpaid wages. Ms. Tirkey described herself as “low caste” and “servant class”, the Tribunal noted. The Chandoks, who recruited her in 2008, “wanted someone who would be not merely of service but servile”, the Tribunal said. They did not seek to recruit a U.K. resident “because no such person would have accepted the intended conditions of work”.
The Tribunal upheld several of the victim’s claims on working conditions. Ms. Tirkey performed childcare duties, cooking, cleaning and laundry for the couple, their twin children, and visiting relatives. She slept on a mattress on the floor on a converted landing. Her working day ended at 12 pm after which she was on night call.
She was not allowed to go out alone, nor contact anyone. Telephone calls from her family in India were restricted and her employees kept her passport and bankcard with them.
The Tribunal said that the Respondents did not allow the victim, who is a Christian, to bring her bible with her nor attend church. They referred to her as “girl”, and made her wear inappropriate second hand clothing. It was clear that the claimant was treated disadvantageously because “she was born in a sect preordained to work in a servile capacity for wealthier Indians who were …of a higher caste background”, the Tribunal said.
According to the Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit (ATLEU), which took up her case, Ms. Tirkey responded with relief to the judgment. “I want the public to know what happened to me as it must not happen to anyone else. The stress and anxiety that this sort of thing creates for a person can destroy them. I have not been able to smile because my life had been destroyed. Now I am able to smile again. Now I am free.”
Dalit groups in the U.K., which have been pressing the Government to amend the Equalities Act 2010 to include caste discrimination as an aspect of race discrimination, have welcomed the Tribunal’s verdict.
“This is an excellent outcome for the victim,” said Meena Varma of the Dalit Solidarity Network. While this judgment will be closely studied by the U.K. government, the Tribunal’s decision “refers to this case alone and does not set a precedent”, she said. “In this order, the judge said that discrimination could be established under the ‘ethnic origin’ aspect of the Equalities Act – but that other cases could be different. Therefore, we still need caste-based discrimination legislation to protect potential victims of caste discrimination.”
Chris Milsom of Cloisters, barrister for Ms. Tirkey, highlighted the significance of the judgment in recognising caste discrimination as a human rights violation for the first time. “Those who have closely followed the legislative history of the Equality Act will recall that the Government’s original rationale for refusing explicit prohibition of caste-based discrimination was that there was no evidence of it taking place in the UK. The damning findings of the Employment Tribunal render this stance untenable. Where such discrimination exists its victims must be protected.”
