Catholic Sales Manager Awarded Over £20,000 In Discrimination Case

A woman has been awarded over £20,000 in compensation after an employment tribunal found she has been discriminated against, harassed and victimised on the grounds of her religious belief or political opinion and constructively unfairly dismissed.

Helen Scott, 52, worked for as a sales manager for Stevenson & Reid Ltd in Belfast.

With support from the Equality Commission in Northern Ireland she was awarded a total of £20,736.

The company's workforce is predominantly Protestant, and at the time of the events described, Ms Scott was the only Catholic employee in the east Belfast showroom. Ms Scott had worked for the respondent from 01 August 2011 until 21 August 2015, when she resigned. 

The discrimination and harassment started after an incident on 31 July 2015 when her line manager, who was a director, found out that he was to attend a meeting in her place. He shouted and swore at her in front of her colleagues and, as part of the outburst, shouted "Tiocfaidh ar lá" into her face, in what Ms Scott found a menacing manner. Ms Scott said she was stunned and embarrassed by the use of that phrase in front of other members of staff and she was anxious and upset about the incident over the following days. She believed the phrase was directed at her because of her religious background and perceived political opinion with the intention of causing her offence.

In its decision the Tribunal found that the phrase "has a clear sectarian significance" and that "the ground for using the phrase 'Tiocfaidh ar lá' was the claimant's religion or political opinion". The Tribunal said: "This can only be a threat and is somewhat menacing given that the claimant was the only Catholic working in the showroom." 

The line manager chose to use a phrase with an obvious and acknowledged sectarian significance.

The Tribunal said it was clear that the behaviour of her line manager towards Ms Scott in a public area before colleagues was "unwanted and had the effect, if not the purpose, of violating the claimant’s dignity as well as creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating and offensive environment" for her. The panel concluded "that the ground for the offensive treatment of the claimant …was her religion or political opinion" and that her line manager was therefore guilty of harassment.

Ms Scott made a formal complaint on 3 August 2015 and the Tribunal described this as the 'protected act'. The Tribunal noted that the respondents initiated an investigation into customer complaints against Ms Scott after she raised her grievance. The Tribunal noted that none of these complaints being investigated were contemporaneous; they related to events at least between six and 12 months old. It noted that "no attempt was made to gather the details and evaluate the complaints so that an investigation would be fair for the person to be investigated". The Tribunal concluded that "the reason for the initiation of an investigation process was the claimant’s doing of the protected act".

Ms Scott went on sick leave on 12 August 2015. A recorded delivery letter for sick absence without notification, accusing her of breaking her contract, was sent while the company knew a medical certificate was en route. The Tribunal was "persuaded, on the balance of probabilities, that the issuing of the recorded delivery letter asserting that the claimant was in breach of her contract of employment relates to the grievance raised" by Ms Scott.

The Tribunal found that the investigation, along with the treatment she subsequently received during her sick leave, constituted victimisation.

(CD)