Member S Downie Tribunal Member L Grime M McKay v Represented by A Buchanan, Solicitor Jet 2.com Limited — 2024

The tribunal found that the claimant worked as cabin crew for Jet2.com Limited from 20 June 2022 to 13 August 2023 and that the respondent had a uniform policy applying to customer-facing staff, including rules on hairstyle. The claimant’s hair was shaved at the sides with a longer top section, and the tribunal found that she had an undercut because there was no graduation or blend between the top section and the shaved sides. Her male comparators, AB and CD, also had short hair with shaved sides and longer hair on top, but did not have an undercut and their hair was graduated between the sides and the top.

On 10 July 2023 Stewart McKenzie told the claimant that she needed to grow out her undercut to comply with the uniform policy. The tribunal accepted that the meeting was brief, polite and amicable, and found it more likely that he did not tell her she would be unable to fly if she did not change her hair. It also noted that the claimant herself indicated in the meeting and in later emails that she was willing to adapt her style, although she did not agree with the request. The tribunal found that the respondent’s explanation was that her hairstyle was not compliant with the policy, which prohibited styles including Mohicans and undercuts.

The direct sex discrimination complaint failed because the tribunal found material differences between the claimant and her male comparators and held that the respondent’s treatment was because of the perceived breach of the uniform policy, not because of sex. It also noted that the respondent applied its uniform policy to both male and female staff, had previously raised hairstyle issues with both sexes, and had not disciplined any member of staff for failure to meet the policy. The tribunal therefore rejected the contention that the claimant was treated less favourably than an appropriate comparator because she was a woman.

The constructive dismissal complaint also failed. The tribunal accepted that the claimant resigned because of the request concerning her hair, but held that the request was not discriminatory and did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract or a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. It therefore concluded that there was no discriminatory constructive dismissal and dismissed both complaints. The grievance outcome in October 2023 likewise recorded that her hair was in breach of policy, that there was no evidence she had been treated differently from colleagues, and that she could reapply for a role.