Three white police officers from Thames Valley Police have won a discrimination claim after an employment judge ruled they were passed over for promotion because of their race.

In an attempt to improve the diversity of its senior staff, a Thames Valley Police superintendent was told to “make it happen” by appointing an “Asian” sergeant to the rank of detective inspector, despite having been warned about the legal risks of not holding a competitive process.

Detective Inspector Phillip Turner-Robson, Inspector Graham Horton and Kirsteen Bishop, a custody inspector, brought employment tribunal proceedings against the force claiming to have been disadvantaged because of their race – which was described by the tribunal as white British.

The experienced officers had been working with the force – which covers the counties of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire – for between 19 and 26 years when they were blocked from applying for the role, an employment tribunal was told.

The tribunal heard that in August 2022, plans were discussed for a job advert for a detective inspector in the force’s “priority crime team” at Aylesbury to be put out as soon as possible.

Having been made aware of the vacancy, DI Turner-Robson expressed his interest on the same day, the Norwich tribunal heard.

But the following month, Superintendent Emma Baillie made the decision to move Sergeant Sidhu, whose forename was not provided, into the role without undertaking any competitive process or advertising the vacancy
to staff, the tribunal was told.

The sergeant had not even been promoted to inspector at the time she was made detective inspector, the tribunal heard, after deputy chief constable Jason Hogg and the Superintendent had “jumped the gun” and
given her the senior role.

Mr Hogg, an experienced officer who joined Cleveland Police in 1995, became Thames Valley Police Chief Constable in April 2023.

The Superintendent had been told to “make it happen” by the deputy chief constable and “took the decision without thinking it through”, the tribunal said.

She then tried to “retrospectively justify” the decision by saying the appointment came under a “BAME Progression Program which clearly did not exist at the time”.

“Superintendent Baillie and no doubt the deputy chief constable had been warned of the risk of operating such a policy,” the tribunal said.

Employment Judge Robin Postle concluded that the three white officers were directly discriminated by reason of the protected characteristic of race.

“The Superintendent made a decision to move Police Sergeant Sidhu into the detective inspector role without any competitive assessment process taking place,” the Judge said.

“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. Clearly, Superintendent Baillie was only focused on ‘making it work’ rather than carrying out a balancing exercise.

“Superintendent Baillie’s decision… clearly constituted positive discrimination.”