Cases3309890/2022

Claimant v Clarion Housing Group Limited

13 February 2025Before Employment Judge AlliottWatfordin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Direct Discrimination(race)failed

The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to less favourable treatment because of his race. The tribunal found that a hypothetical comparator who was not black African in not materially different circumstances would have been treated in the same way. The investigation, disciplinary process, and other treatment were all found to be for legitimate business reasons unrelated to race.

Facts

The claimant, a black African customer support officer employed since 2014, brought race discrimination claims after being investigated and given a first written warning for call avoidance and internet misuse in March 2022. He alleged this was part of a vendetta following a grievance he raised in November 2019. The investigation began after contact centre advisors reported silent calls and an audit identified the claimant as having a high volume of short duration calls between September-November 2021. The claimant was given a written warning which resulted in him losing his bonus and pay rise. He appealed unsuccessfully.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed all claims of race discrimination. The tribunal found that the investigation, disciplinary process, and treatment were all for legitimate business reasons. A hypothetical non-black African comparator in similar circumstances would have been treated the same way. The tribunal rejected the claimant's theory that this was a vendetta following his 2019 grievance, finding no evidence that the managers involved bore any grudge.

Practical note

A claimant alleging race discrimination must show more than procedural unfairness or harsh treatment; without evidence linking the treatment to race, claims will fail even where some treatment is proven.

Legal authorities cited

Statutes

Equality Act 2010 s.13Equality Act 2010 s.136Equality Act 2010 s.23Equality Act 2010 s.123

Case details

Case number
3309890/2022
Decision date
13 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
5
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Customer Support Officer / Customer Accounts Specialist

Claimant representation

Represented
No