‘It was so painful’: Diversity officer on suing University of Arts for discrimination

An equality and diversity officer who successfully sued her university employer for discrimination has criticised the sector’s failures to tackle racism in an exclusive interview with The Independent.

Nina Rahel, 59, who worked at the University of the Arts London, was forced out of her job of nine years after she pointed out the organisation’s failure to deal with racism complaints or support Black and Asian students, an employment tribunal ruled in July.

Shortly after raising these concerns and flagging other issues within the university, Ms Rahel was informed that she was losing her job in a restructuring that yielded additional roles but had no room for her.

Speaking out for the first time since a tribunal found she was victimised and unfairly dismissed, the professional described her claim against her ex-employers as a necessary but taxing “David versus Goliath” battle.

“I had no choice but to lodge a claim,” Ms Rahel, who is of south Asian heritage and lives in London, told The Independent.

“It was so awful what they did, and it was the fact that it happened within the diversity team, too.

“I was outraged at being treated so poorly and it didn't make any sense. At the time, I felt like a very lone voice and as though I was losing my mind.

“It seemed to be so outrageous that you can have a restructure of the diversity team, and increase the number of staff yet there’s no room for me, despite my years of experience.”

Following global Black Lives Matter demonstrations in 2020, Ms Rahel started to raise concerns about the university’s lack of appropriate response, including an inadequate anti-racism strategy and insufficient support for students.

In August 2020, Ms Rahel was asked to complete a planning, review and appraisal form which was used to provide employee feedback on issues of wellbeing, achievements, challenges plus more, which would be uploaded to the HR system as required by the PRA policy.

In the form, Ms Rahel said the organisation was incapable of giving a correct response to accusations of racism, giving an example of them offering coaching, instead of counselling, to students and staff who experienced racism.

However, her form was not uploaded to the HR system by her managerIsabella Chan and no further discussion was had about the feedback. The tribunal heard that Ms Chan chose to “ignore” the feedback.

“The environment there was that if you speak out, you’ll be in trouble, and that has been borne out by the treatment that I received. It was so painful,” Ms Rahel explained.

In or around December 2020, Ms Rahel’s manager decided to restructure the equality and diversity team but the impact of her proposal had a direct impact on just one member of staff: Ms Rahel.

The new proposal mapped out a new role of equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) manager for staff and students, which was the same band as Ms Rahel’s role, plus two more junior roles.

Ms Rahel expressed her concerns about the redundancy process to the vice-chancellor of the university in April 2021, making complaints of discrimination on the grounds of disability, age and race.

However, the process continued as normal in a move that the tribunal panel described as “a convenient way to get rid of the claimant”.

Ms Rahel says her experience is reflected across the EDI sector where workers are disregarded and the work is not taken seriously.

“A lot of the time EDI officers are ignored, undermined, faced with a brick wall and at UAL it was a tick-box exercise,” she said.

“They don’t put enough resources in, pay enough attention, educate themselves or they aren’t held accountable for failings when it comes to all forms of discrimination.”

Following the restructuring announcement, Ms Rahel was signed off work by her GP and her boss, Ms Chan, denied her request for a reasonably adjusted assessment for the EDI manager vacancy.

Moreover, Ms Rahel was offered an interview whilst she was still on sick leave and unable to attend.

She later received a letter giving her three months’ notice of redundancy.

Despite numerous requests that the recruitment process be paused until she was well enough to interview, up until the date of her dismissal, Ms Rahel was not given the chance to interview for the EDI manager job or the other two roles.

This battle has taken a physical, emotional and mental toll, Ms Rahel said, including the loss of sight in her left eye due to type-one diabetes complications; though the professional previously managed her diabetes, the stress of her work situation exacerbated her health issues.

It affected her marriage and family life, as well as her capacity to trust future prospective employers.

“These people are meant to be committed to equality, diversity and inclusion. How can you treat somebody like this when that's your work, your field? So that hurt. It made me very angry and unstable.”

Though Ms Rahel welcomed the judgement and made her feel “vindicated”, the cost has been high.

“I had to jump through all those hoops to get to this point for the judge to repeat what I'd been saying at the very beginning. That makes me sad, but then I had to go through all of that.

“But, of course, if the judge hadn't come to his decision, I would have been wrecked and destroyed. It's good that I finally got some sort of vindication.”

Responding to the outcome, Zillur Rahman of Rahman Lowe Solicitors, who represented Ms Rahel, praised her “courage”.

“I am truly delighted for Nina,” Mr Rahman said.

“She showed enormous courage in challenging what she considered was unfair and discriminatory right from the beginning.

“What is an aggravating feature in this case is that Nina worked within the EDI department, whose purpose is to combat discrimination at the University.”

The University of the Arts London is a group of six colleges, hailed as a globally renowned educational institution for art and design courses

A University of the Arts London (UAL) spokesperson told The Independent: “Whilst we note that the judgment is confined to its own specific facts and events that occurred in 2021, linked to one restructure, we respect the tribunal’s decision against UAL and the institution is reflecting on its findings.”

According to UAL’s website, EDI are integral parts of its strategy, values and activities.

When questioned about how Ms Rahel’s case reflects upon the university’s commitment to inclusion, the spokesperson said the university has made “significant progress in ensuring all members of UAL’s diverse community are empowered to reach their full potential”.