In person For the v Respondent — 2023

The claimant, a Filipino Catholic Band 6 Team Leader, brought claims of direct race discrimination and direct religion or belief discrimination arising out of the handling of two main grievances: one against Jherico Ocampo and one against Sarah Haines. The tribunal found that the case centred on the employer's decision to consolidate the grievance and counter-grievance involving Mr Ocampo, the later investigation and disciplinary process arising from events on 26 March 2019, and the handling of the Sarah Haines grievance and appeal process. It also noted that many of the claimant's complaints were framed as unfairness or procedural criticism before race or religion was mentioned.

On the race claim, the tribunal held that the consolidated approach to the Ocampo grievance and counter-grievance was sensible and fair in the circumstances, and that any delay was caused by a combination of the claimant's own reluctance to attend meetings, changes in personnel, attempts at conciliation, and later the Covid-19 pause. It accepted that the process could have been handled better in some respects, particularly in not giving advance notice when the terms of reference were widened, but said that this did not amount to less favourable treatment. It also found that the disciplinary hearing, the final written warning, the grievance outcomes, the appeal handling, the meeting notes, and the alleged lack of support did not amount to race discrimination.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's suggestion that there had been a conspiracy or that the grievance had been deliberately turned into a disciplinary matter because of race. It found no evidence that any of the individuals involved knew enough about the claimant's protected characteristics to act on them, and it noted that Mr Ocampo was also Filipino. It also found that the minor errors in the investigation report were immaterial, that the notes were not deliberately altered, and that the claimant had not been disadvantaged by the way the hearings were managed. The claimant's race claim therefore failed in full.

On the religion or belief claim, the tribunal limited the issue to the refusal to uphold the Sarah Haines grievance about the claimant's objection to abortion-related work. It found that the claimant's Catholic belief was not in dispute, but held that the grievance outcome was based on the evidence and the investigation report, not on religion or belief. The tribunal therefore dismissed that claim as well. It also recorded that, so far as any issues were potentially out of time, it would have extended time as just and equitable, but that did not affect the ultimate dismissal of the claims.