Mr Staph (Claimant’s husband) v Respondent — 2021

Ms Staph, described in the judgment as black Caribbean origin, brought complaints of direct race discrimination, race-related harassment, victimisation, and a separate failure to consult complaint that was withdrawn. The case arose from the Respondent's post-merger restructure, in which the ASBO role ceased and staff were considered for roles including Legal Caseworker and Housing Officer under the Integration and Change Policy.

The Tribunal found that the Legal Caseworker assessment requirement applied to all ASBOs and was not a race-based proxy. It accepted that managers did not always emphasise the pass/fail nature of the assessment in meetings, but the documents referred to assessment and the need to pass it, and the Claimant was treated no differently from her colleagues. The Claimant did not pass the assessment, she was not deployed into the LCW role, and she was later not shortlisted; the Tribunal found that these outcomes followed from the assessment process and not from race.

The Tribunal also rejected the complaints about the Floating Housing Officer email, the grievance investigation and outcome, the comments that the Claimant was angry or confused, the grievance appeal wording, the transfer to Housing Officer, and the later discussion about probation and the trial period. Where comments were made, the Tribunal found they reflected the speaker's perception or the merits of the grievance, or arose from error, and did not amount to harassment or victimisation. It accepted that Ms Cook's reference to a tribunal and to remaining an NHG employee should be taken at face value, and it found that the time-limit issue did not need to be decided because the claims failed on the merits. All Equality Act complaints were dismissed and no remedy was awarded.