Claimant v Tesco Stores Limited

The tribunal found that the Respondent did not discriminate against the Claimant on the grounds of race when making and investigating allegations about overtime hours and pay adjustments. The tribunal concluded the investigation and allegations were legitimate and not motivated by race.

The tribunal found that issuing a final written warning on 23 June 2023 was not discriminatory on grounds of race. The disciplinary action was found to be justified by the conduct investigated and not motivated by the Claimant's race.

The tribunal found that the sanction of transferring the Claimant out of his administration role following the final written warning was not excessive, disproportionate, or discriminatory on grounds of race. The sanction was deemed appropriate in the circumstances.

The tribunal found that withholding the written invitation to the disciplinary hearing dated 21 June 2023 and inviting the Claimant verbally instead was not discriminatory on grounds of race. The procedural approach did not amount to less favourable treatment because of race.

The tribunal found that the handling of the Claimant's grievance dated 19 September 2023, including failures to respond within timescales, treating it as informal, failing to take notes, and failing to provide an outcome, was not discriminatory on grounds of race.

The tribunal found that failing to respond to the Claimant's flexible working request dated 26 August 2023 was not discriminatory on grounds of race. The failure to respond was not motivated by the Claimant's race.

The tribunal found that making and investigating the allegations regarding overtime and pay adjustments did not amount to harassment related to race. The conduct was not unwanted conduct related to race that violated the Claimant's dignity or created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.

The tribunal found that demoting the Claimant to an ordinary Customer Services Assistant following the final written warning on 23 June 2023 did not amount to harassment related to race. The demotion was a legitimate sanction and not unwanted conduct related to race.