Claimant v British Telecommunications plc

The tribunal found no facts to suggest dismissal on 7 December 2023 was because of the claimant's anxiety, depression, or anaemia. The claimant simply asserted that because she had these conditions, dismissal must be discriminatory. The tribunal found Ms Hollywood carefully considered the allegations about inappropriate language and concluded dismissal was justified with no taint of disability discrimination.

All reasonable adjustment complaints were out of time (pre-24 May 2023). The tribunal found they were not part of conduct extending over a period and declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis. The claimant had presented her claim whilst still awaiting internal grievance outcomes, undermining her explanation for delay.

Harassment complaint regarding Mr Masood's response on 18 May 2023 was out of time and dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. The complaint about Mr Masood's handling of the investigation on 21-22 June 2023 was in time but failed on merits. The tribunal found no facts to shift the burden of proof; Mr Masood was conducting a legitimate investigation under the respondent's procedures.

Direct race discrimination complaints about the new start policy, investigation handling, and dismissal all failed. The tribunal found no evidence beyond the claimant's assertion that because she is Romanian, any less favourable treatment must be because of race. The tribunal found the new start policy was applied because of the claimant's language on 9 June 2023 and in subsequent emails, not because she showed Mr Sliman the middle finger. Complaints about pay, loan, and bonus issues were out of time.

Race harassment complaints largely failed. The complaint about Mr Sliman showing the middle finger on various occasions ending 16 May 2023 was out of time. Even if in time, evidence showed Mr Sliman showed the middle finger to both male and female colleagues of different backgrounds, negating a race link. Complaints about investigation handling and 'siding with Mr Sliman' failed as there were no facts to shift burden of proof.

Direct sex discrimination complaints mirrored the race claims and failed for similar reasons. The tribunal noted the department was 20-30% female due to fewer women applying at recruitment stage. There were no facts beyond assertion to suggest less favourable treatment was because of sex. Complaints about working arrangements, pay issues, investigation handling, and dismissal all failed. The dismissal was for inappropriate language, which the claimant admitted and showed no accountability for.

Sex harassment complaints failed on same grounds as race harassment. Mr Sliman's middle finger gesture was directed at both male and female colleagues. The tribunal found no facts to suggest the investigation handling or other alleged conduct related to the claimant's sex. The complaint about Mr Hassan walking down the corridor was found to have no basis in custom or fact.