Miss Melissa Powell v Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust — 2020

Miss Melissa Powell, a black woman, was employed by Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and worked from 2 July 2018 as an Assistant Pathway Administrator in the ENT department. She complained of direct race discrimination and harassment, relying on alleged downgraded duties, lack of support or guidance, lack of additional duties and learning opportunities, lack of redeployment opportunity, lack of training, and being told in July 2018 that she was not fitting in with the team.

The Tribunal rejected the allegation that the claimant's role had been downgraded. It found that, during her short time in the ENT department, she covered almost all aspects of her job role, with a limited number of tasks not performed because the work was not available at the relevant time. It concluded on the balance of probabilities that the claimant and Rebecca, the other Assistant Pathway Administrator, did the same tasks and that there was no practical difference in their allocation of work.

On support, guidance, additional duties, and training, the Tribunal found that the claimant's relationships with colleagues deteriorated quickly and that her disappointment with the role contributed to tensions at work. It found that Marinda Rye attempted to provide guidance and support, including arranging for the claimant to speak with Hollie Charlett, and that Claire McCabe counselled the claimant about workplace relationships. The Tribunal also found that the claimant accepted she had carried out all but two of the tasks in her job role, that the explanation for the remaining tasks was unconnected with discrimination, and that she had not shown she was deprived of training.

The redeployment allegation was dismissed because the Tribunal found that the respondent's reorganisation did not affect the claimant's ENT role and no redeployment issue arose for her. Although the claimant applied and interviewed for other roles in the Trust, the Tribunal found there was no influence on that process by anyone connected with the matters in the case.

The Tribunal found it likely that something was said to the claimant about not fitting in, but that it was said in the context of a discussion about her engagement with colleagues and how she might repair or improve relations. It found no facts from which it could conclude that the statement was made because of the claimant's race. For harassment, the Tribunal found that the comment did not have the purpose or effect of violating the claimant's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment, that it was not reasonable for it to have that effect in context, and in any event that it was not related to race. The claims were not well founded and were dismissed, with no remedy awarded.