Skip to main content

Insight article

December 13, 2018

Caste discrimination at work

Caste is not currently one of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 and therefore caste discrimination is not explicitly prohibited.

The term caste denotes a hereditary, endogamous (marrying within the group) community associated with a traditional occupation and ranked accordingly on a perceived scale of ritual purity.

For those unaware of the workings of the caste system, the terms can be baffling, with different names used to identify the lowest castes and different groups having different statuses depending on the caste system to which they belong.

In July 2018, the government published the outcome of a consultation on whether legislation was needed to protect against caste discrimination. The government decided that it would not legislate in this area but would rely on emerging case law. This means an arguably more laissez-faire approach of allowing case law to develop, in which it is argued that caste is covered by the current definitions of race or religious belief.

There is clearly an overlap between religious belief and race discrimination with caste discrimination, but the larger question will be whether some forms of caste discrimination will fall outside of the scope of either of these two forms of discrimination. Some castes are based on occupation or profession; therefore, individuals suffering the effects of this type of discrimination may not be protected.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s response to the government’s decision was:

“The government has missed a crucial opportunity to improve legal clarity and has taken a step back by looking to repeal the duty to include caste as an aspect of race in the Equality Act 2010. This is inconsistent with the UK’s international obligations to provide for separate and distinct protection for caste in our legislation.”

As things stand, those who claim to be victims of caste discrimination are now reliant on ‘caste discrimination’ being captured under race and/or ethnic origins within section 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

Where a claimant has been treated less favourably because they are believed to be a member of, or descended from, a separate race or ethnic group, the existing provisions of section 9 should come into play. However, whether this is an improvement on a statutory definition is questionable.

Call employment solicitor Karen Cole today if you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • Supporting neurodiverse people in family law matters
    Understanding neurodiversity in the legal context.


    Read more
  • Supreme court ruling on referees’ employment status
    In PGMOL v HMRC, the Supreme Court considered whether professional referees were self-employed. The case has the potential for far-reaching implications across the employment world.


    Read more
  • Business First Magazine
    Read our expert insights on key workplace and corporate issues.


    Read more
  • Why is clear contract drafting important?
    How simple contract clauses can protect your business.


    Read more
  • Ensuring equality: A legal guide to responsibilities and compliance
    Understanding equal opportunities in the workplace


    Read more

What they say...

  • Ian, April 2025
    “Martin and his team at Barker Gillette acted for us in our purchase and sale of property. The chain was lengthy and elements of the work became complex. Martin was tenacious and resolved to answer our queries as they arose. He handled all aspe

  • Henry, April 2025
    “We have purchased flats before with 2 different solicitors who were unable to help us this time. Martin came highly recommended and are we glad. He was very professional in every way: knowledgeable, approachable, he has a friendly manner, very

  • Megan Purcell-Jones, April 2025
    “Charlotte was extremely diligent and thorough. She talked us through the process of making our wills and listened to and understood our needs and the complexities involved. Extremely patient and very clear.”

  • Hena, April 2025
    “Great experience, Patrick was very clear and gave time to explain the legal processes. Friendly and professional communication made me feel comfortable asking questions, received great legal advice.”

  • Michael Constable, April 2025
    “I wanted to revise my will and appoint RIAA Barker Gillette as my Executor and Trustees. This was handled very efficiently and professionally. It helped that I had agreed a fixed fee in advance.” Review left for: Herman Cheung

Read more
Send this to a friend