Benyam Kenbata who worked for Westminster Council in London (now working at Aberdeen Council),
won his appeal for a claim of racial harassment at a tribunal in 2017.
 |
| Potted Plants On A Desk - A Racist Act? |
..... after another worker
had blocked his view in the office in 2013.
The colleague had placed a potted plant on her desk, which he said amounted to 'racial segregation' .... as it “restricted the ease with which he could hold discussions with colleagues”. He had originally lost his claim when the first tribunal ruled that he had “acted in bad faith in making the race discrimination complaint arising from the existence of the overgrown pot plant”, however it had found in favour of just one of his 29 complaints - a discussion held in the open plan office, should have been confidential. He was told to pay £10,000 towards costs.
But the appeal overturned this ruling, stating that his complaint “was not an act of mischief after all” and “the discussion in the open-plan office was racial harassment”, because his managers response to the original allegation “was capable of violating his dignity or creating a humiliating environment for him” (no doubt). Confusingly, the tribunal went on to say that there was no racial discrimination as they found no evidence that “race was an issue in the office”.
The colleague had placed a potted plant on her desk, which he said amounted to 'racial segregation' .... as it “restricted the ease with which he could hold discussions with colleagues”. He had originally lost his claim when the first tribunal ruled that he had “acted in bad faith in making the race discrimination complaint arising from the existence of the overgrown pot plant”, however it had found in favour of just one of his 29 complaints - a discussion held in the open plan office, should have been confidential. He was told to pay £10,000 towards costs.
But the appeal overturned this ruling, stating that his complaint “was not an act of mischief after all” and “the discussion in the open-plan office was racial harassment”, because his managers response to the original allegation “was capable of violating his dignity or creating a humiliating environment for him” (no doubt). Confusingly, the tribunal went on to say that there was no racial discrimination as they found no evidence that “race was an issue in the office”.
It said he should still pay £10,000 towards the council’s costs as he had acted “unreasonably” with respect to his other 28 claims.
The cost of all this was £60,000 which the council has to pick up. John O’Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers Alliance, said: “Long, drawn-out tribunals like this are in nobody’s interest. They hurt those involved as well as costing taxpayers. Reform of the system is needed.” .... no wonder so many claims are uncontested.
The cost of all this was £60,000 which the council has to pick up. John O’Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers Alliance, said: “Long, drawn-out tribunals like this are in nobody’s interest. They hurt those involved as well as costing taxpayers. Reform of the system is needed.” .... no wonder so many claims are uncontested.
These PC driven
tribunals should be toughened up both in membership, and the rules that
allow these frivolous and expensive claims.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcomed, or even just thanks if you enjoyed the post. But please make any comment relevant to the post it appears under. Off topic comments will be blocked or removed.
Moderation is on for older posts to stop spamming and comments that are off topic or inappropriate from being posted .... comments are reviewed within 48 hours. I don't block normal comments that are on topic and not inappropriate. Vexatious comments that may cause upset to other commentators, or that are attempting to espouse a particular wider political view, are reviewed before acceptance. But a certain amount of debate around a post topic is accepted, as long as it remains generally on topic and is not an attempt to become sounding board for some other cause.
Final decision on all comments is held by the blog author and is final.
Comments are always monitored for bad or abusive language, and or illegal statements i.e. overtly racist or sexist content. Spam is not tolerated and is removed.
Commentaires ne sont surveillés que pour le mauvais ou abusif langue ou déclarations illégales ie contenu ouvertement raciste ou sexiste. Spam ne est pas toléré et est éliminé.