DISCRIMINATION - 25.08.2017

£360,000 for saying “women are more emotional”

The Court of Appeal has confirmed that a woman is entitled to £360,000 compensation after a male manager said that “women take things more emotionally than men”. Will such comments always attract hefty awards?

Background facts

In July 2017 the Court of Appeal handed down its ruling in the case of BAE Sytems Ltd v Marion Konczak 2017 ( see The next step ). Konczak (K) began working for BAE Systems as a secretary in 1998 and was based at Samlesbury. She was part of a liaison team that worked with officers from the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF). In 2005 K was moved to BAE’s commercial team in Warton. However, she felt unhappy there and claimed she wasn’t given a proper job to do.

Back to the old place

In March 2006 K applied for a job back at Samlesbury, but not in her original team. At this point her manager, Jeremy Dent (D), proposed that she should resume working with her original team at Samlesbury but in a different role. K was upset by this proposal as it would involve her working with officers she’d previously complained about. K believed that her objections to the move weren’t being taken seriously and, during a further meeting with D, she broke down in tears.

Emotionally charged

Shortly afterwards D went to see K and said words to the effect that women take things more emotionally than men, while men tend to forget things and move on. K took the comment badly and the following day she went off sick. She presented a medical certificate issued by her GP which cited “work-related stress”. K never returned to work and she was dismissed in July 2007. BAE’s dismissal letter said that it was not appropriate for K to return to her old job and there were no other positions available for her.

Various claims

K issued a tribunal claim and made various allegations including 16 complaints of sex discrimination (which included D’s comment), victimisation, a failure to make reasonable adjustments, unfair dismissal and breach of contract. There were several hearings at the tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). Only one of the 16 sex discrimination complaints succeeded - the one that D’s comment amounted to sex discrimination. It was also decided that K’s dismissal had been unfair.

Upheld on appeal

The EAT eventually concluded that K was entitled to £360,178.60 in damages. BAE appealed against this decision to the Court of Appeal. It described D’s comment as clumsy but also noted that it was central to the proceedings and the final straw for K. As the EAT’s compensation ruling was upheld, does this mean that all clumsy but sexist comments will attract such significant awards? Tip. Discrimination claims can attract unlimited damages - so, in theory, any single gender-stereotyping comment could attract an award of this level. However, in this case, which has some unusual facts, K had complained about bullying and harassment over a lengthy period; she also suffered from depression which meant she was sometimes in a more fragile state. To err on the side of caution, make it clear that any form of gender-stereotyping is not acceptable in your workplace.

For the Court of Appeal’s ruling in this case, visit http://tipsandadvice-personnel.co.uk/download (PS 19.15.03).

Thankfully, this isn’t the going rate for sexist comments - this case had some unusual facts. However, comments that suggest gender-stereotyping can easily land you in hot water, even if they are well-intentioned. So to err on the side of caution make it clear they are not acceptable in your workplace.

© Indicator - FL Memo Ltd

Tel.: (01233) 653500 • Fax: (01233) 647100

subscriptions@indicator-flm.co.ukwww.indicator-flm.co.uk

Calgarth House, 39-41 Bank Street, Ashford, Kent TN23 1DQ

VAT GB 726 598 394 • Registered in England • Company Registration No. 3599719