Ms S Gordon v Southern Housing — 2023

The tribunal heard two linked claims by Ms S Gordon against Southern Housing. The first claim, presented in February 2020, alleged direct race discrimination, harassment and victimisation arising out of the 2018 restructure of the Home Ownership team and later grievance matters. The second claim, presented in May 2021 after her employment ended on 22 April 2021, alleged further direct race discrimination, harassment, victimisation and constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal extended time for the Equality Act complaints on a just and equitable basis, but the judgment was on liability only and did not determine remedy.

On the first claim, the tribunal found that the claimant was not paid acting-up pay for August to October 2018 because the new senior property manager role had not yet been implemented in the way Mr Osman envisaged and she was not performing that role. It accepted that the later grievance outcome upheld her pay point because of a misunderstanding, not because of race. The tribunal also found that Mr Osman did not tell her not to apply for the senior property manager post, that the interview panel reached an honest view that she was not appointable, and that the 12-month secondment at a 10% reduced salary was consistent with the restructuring business case. It noted that a white employee had also been offered a reduced-salary development opportunity.

The tribunal further found that returning her to her PM role in November 2019 and not offering her a permanent SPM post followed changing business needs and the deletion of the Kent and Sussex role, not race. It rejected the allegations that she was left out of information updates in January and February 2020 and that Mr Osman told Ms Cooper that she thought she was racist. The harassment and victimisation complaints failed because the alleged conduct either did not occur or was not related to race, and the victimisation allegation based on the information updates failed because no detriment was proved. The tribunal attached only limited weight to Ms Emery's comment that matters did not look good because the claimant was the only non-white senior manager.

In the second claim, the tribunal found that the request for a formal sickness review was a normal response to the records available, that Ms Oleksy did not refuse Christmas leave in the way alleged, and that Mr Osman did not tell Ms Oleksy to treat the team badly. Those findings defeated the race discrimination, harassment and victimisation complaints. The constructive unfair dismissal claim also failed: the tribunal held that the complaint about the unpaid salary review communication was not, alone or with the other matters, a fundamental breach of contract, the alleged last straw did not occur, and the claimant had not resigned in response to any repudiatory breach.