In person For the v Respondent — 2020

The claimant, a black woman employed from 5 November 2018, brought claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination arising from her probationary period, its extension, her resignation, and the way her manager handled her work and performance. The tribunal recorded that the unfair dismissal claim had already been struck out on 30 September 2019 because she did not have two years' service.

On the race claim, the tribunal found that Ms Fenn closely supervised the claimant but did not micromanage her, did not overload her with work, and was trying to support her in a new and demanding role. The claimant's probation was extended because of performance concerns and the tribunal found that this was not because she had taken time off for eye surgery, although that absence meant the review was delayed. The tribunal also found that the criticisms in the probation review were fair and accurate, including on the Salesforce classifications project, Trustpilot work, knowledge base project, and the claimant's level of curiosity.

The tribunal treated the March 2019 email dispute as the only allegation that arguably involved race, finding that Ms Fenn described the email as combative and may also have used the word aggressive, but did not appreciate any racial connotation and would have handled it the same way for a white employee. It also rejected the allegations about the notice period and lateness, finding no evidence that similarly situated white employees would have been treated differently. Applying the Equality Act burden of proof authorities, the tribunal concluded that the claimant had not proved primary facts from which discrimination could properly be inferred, and dismissed the race discrimination claim.