In person For the v Respondent — 2020

Mr Haughton was an agency First Contact Officer in Merton's MASH. The tribunal recorded that a decision was made on 13 July 2020 to end his assignment early, with the respondent telling Comensura on 16 July that his last day would be 22 July 2020. His claims arose from Ms Morris's concerns in July 2020 about his handling of a school contact and a police report, from communications with HR and the agency when the assignment ended, and from the respondent's handling of an earlier assault at work in November 2019.

On race discrimination, the tribunal accepted that Ms Morris did raise concerns that the claimant had introduced himself as a social worker and disclosed elements of a police report to Brookways School, and that she criticised his response when challenged. It found those were objectively serious matters and were not raised because the claimant had referred to reduced diversity in the team. It also rejected the suggestion that Ms Morris was dismissive of him because he was black, found no evidence that the reason for her disbelief was his race, and held that the comparator relied on for the suspension comparison was not materially similar. The allegation against Ms Poulter failed because the claimant had named her in error, or because passing the respondent's concerns to the agency was a genuine error with no racial element.

On sex discrimination, the tribunal accepted that the respondent was remiss in the way it communicated with the claimant after his personal injury claim had been started, and that he understandably felt dismissed, but it found no evidence that the delay in investigating the assault or the lack of updates was because he was male. On victimisation, the tribunal held that saying the team was less diverse was not a protected act within s.27 Equality Act 2010, and in any event that comment played no part in the decision to report concerns to the agency or in the decision to end the assignment. The tribunal also noted evidence of complaints by other staff about Ms Morris, but did not find that the claimant had proved facts from which discrimination or victimisation could be inferred. All claims were dismissed and no monetary award was made.