Claimant v Y and others — 2022

The claimant was a Black British male supply teacher working through an agency at the third respondent's school. After a PE lesson on 13 November 2020 and parental allegations on 17 November 2020 that he had taught with an erection, the first respondent, who was Head Teacher and a DSL, carried out an initial consideration under the school's safeguarding policy, spoke to relevant staff and pupils, consulted the LADO and referred the matter in accordance with that process. The tribunal accepted her evidence that she kept an open mind, did not decide whether the allegations were true, and acted in line with safeguarding duties rather than because of the claimant's race or sex. The agency later investigated and concluded that the allegations were unsubstantiated.

The whistleblowing detriment claim failed because the claimant's 20 November 2020 email to the agency about a stuffy classroom was not a protected disclosure. The tribunal found that the room had windows and a door, that the evidence did not show any danger to health and safety or any public interest element, and that the correspondence was sent to the agency but not to the respondents, so any later treatment could not have been caused by it.

The harassment and direct discrimination claims were dismissed. The tribunal rejected the allegations that the first respondent 'fished' for complaints, forwarded false allegations, fabricated an allegation that the claimant had chosen girls' PE, or biased the investigation by failing to speak to him. It found that the references to the claimant being alone in a classroom with a female pupil and to girls' PE came from the agency's own email and a pupil's account, not from the respondents. The reason for the steps taken was the safeguarding policy and the receipt of serious allegations, not race or sex, and there was no remedy because all remaining claims failed.