Claimant v Ethiopian Airlines Group
Outcome
Individual claims
Claimant succeeded on 4 of 5 allegations of direct race discrimination: (a) exclusion from May 2022 meeting because it was held in Amharic; (b) meetings regularly held in Amharic without adequate interpretation; (c) discriminatory manner of communicating non-provision of company car ('When we have ET Appointee'); (e) failure to reward cost-saving initiative comparably to Ethiopian colleague. Failed on pay differential allegation due to lack of appropriate comparator.
Tribunal found three PCPs: (1) 4-year rotation policy; (2) meetings held in Amharic; (3) preference for hiring Africans for senior roles per HR manual section 7.3.4.3.3. These put white British employees at particular disadvantage. Claimant was only white British senior employee. Respondent could not show PCPs were proportionate means to legitimate aim. Tribunal rejected 'indigenisation' as legitimate and found policy amounted to unlawful racial bias.
Respondent fundamentally breached implied term of trust and confidence through: unlawful discrimination; long working hours (7 days/week); restrictive leave policy; manufactured final warning without fair process; failure to provide company car; failure to renew fixed-term appointment or communicate plans; downgrading of role offered; inadequate grievance response which was dismissive and insulting. The grievance outcome was the last straw. Claimant resigned within one month, which did not constitute affirmation.
Facts
The claimant, a white British employee, worked for Ethiopian Airlines for 19 years, latterly as Traffic Sales Manager at Manchester Airport on a 4-year fixed-term assignment from December 2018. He was the only senior white British employee in the organisation. He was excluded from important meetings in Addis Ababa, meetings were frequently held in Amharic without interpretation, he was denied a company car (with discriminatory reasoning), worked excessive hours, and was not rewarded for significant cost savings. When his fixed term expired in December 2022, he was eventually offered downgraded roles in Manchester or London. He raised a grievance which was dismissively rejected. He resigned on 2 October 2023 claiming constructive dismissal and race discrimination.
Decision
The tribunal unanimously found the claimant succeeded on 4 of 5 direct race discrimination claims, indirect race discrimination via three PCPs (including an HR policy preferring African employees for senior roles), and constructive unfair dismissal. The respondent's witnesses were found not credible on key points. The tribunal found the respondent breached the implied term of trust and confidence through discriminatory treatment, excessive working hours, a manufactured final warning, and inadequate grievance handling. The claimant's resignation within one month of the grievance outcome did not constitute affirmation.
Practical note
An employer's stated policy preference for employees of a particular national origin for senior roles, coupled with exclusionary practices based on language and nationality, will constitute unlawful direct and indirect race discrimination even in a foreign-owned airline, and such treatment can fundamentally breach trust and confidence justifying constructive dismissal.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2400859/2024
- Decision date
- 11 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 6
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Traffic Sales Manager
- Service
- 19 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor