In the case of Davies v White Dove Garages Ltd, the Employment Tribunal had to consider whether a male employee overhearing conversations of a sexual nature by other male colleagues amounted to sexual harassment.
Facts
The claimant worked as a sales executive for the respondent for a little under one month before they were dismissed. Prior to that, they had had a long career within the motor trade.
The claimant worked within a communal sales office. They complained that they were forced to overhear their colleagues talking about sexual acts, using offensive language of a sexual nature and referring to women in a derogatory way. This was discussed with their manager, however no action was taken on it until after the claimant left the organisation.
They brought various claims before the ET, including for sexual harassment.
Check our BrAInbox for instant answers to questions like:
Employment Tribunal (ET)
The claimant alleged they had overheard a range of offensive language being used in the workplace, including discussions of the sexual activities of their colleagues and derogatory comments towards women.
The respondent argued that the claimant had not objected to the language used and the topics of conversation within the sales office with the sales team itself, despite the claimant being found to be confident and headstrong in their work and their other interactions with their colleagues.
It also said that the context of the work environment was important; the language was indicative of a small, established team that were comfortable and relaxed in each other’s company and who were not situated in a customer facing area. It said that there was no intent to offend, or cause hurt and that it was simply banter between friends. It also claimed that the claimant was being hypersensitive, pointing out that a female employee present in the office was not offended by the language used or topics of conversation.
The ET concluded that there had been unwanted conduct of a sexual nature and it was reasonable for the claimant to have found the language used and comments made to be offensive and unprofessional.
The ET held that whilst the conduct did not have the purpose of violating the claimant’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment as it was not targeted at the claimant or anyone associated with them, it did have that effect.
The ET found that as an employee, the claimant was entitled not to want to hear tales and language of a sexual nature in a workplace, even if what was being said was as a joke or a “humorous exchange” between colleagues in their earshot. It also did not matter that a female colleague was not offended by the comments. In this context an employee is entitled to consider such language to be offensive, inappropriate and unprofessional, even if others involved don’t.
As a result, the sexual harassment claim was upheld.
Check our BrAInbox for instant answers to questions like:
Peninsula Team
Blog
Kate PalmerEmployment Services Director