Ms C Okon v Represented by: Mr T Benjamin - Barrister Tayside Health Board — 2026

The claimant, who is of Black African race, was employed by Tayside Health Board as a Band 4 PA and Medical Secretary in Clinical Neuropsychology from 3 July 2023. She brought claims of direct race discrimination, race-related harassment and victimisation. The direct discrimination allegations concerned alleged lack of assistance at the start of employment, alleged exclusion from a leaving lunch on 24 April 2024, and deletion of files during sickness absence. The harassment allegations included similar matters, the November 2023 improvement plan, an exchange with AR on 20 December 2023, waiting list entries in March and April 2024, and deletion of an audit trail. The victimisation claim concerned delay in investigating the claimant's grievance after it was lodged on 15 August 2024.

The tribunal found that the direct discrimination and harassment claims were out of time. Excluding an alleged incident on 5 March 2025, on which no evidence had been led and which the tribunal did not find established, the latest direct discrimination incident was 3 July 2024 and the latest harassment incident was August 2024. The ET1 was lodged on 6 June 2025. The claimant had trade union assistance and knowledge of her claims by 15 August 2024, and no evidence or submissions were advanced to support a just and equitable extension of time. The tribunal therefore dismissed those claims as out of time.

In any event, the tribunal found that the direct discrimination and harassment allegations were not established on the evidence. It accepted that the claimant had been provided with induction, training and support at the start of employment, that she had been invited by email to the leaving lunch, and that the deletion or reorganisation of files during sickness absence was explained by data protection and records management requirements. It accepted LS's evidence that the improvement plan was intended as a support mechanism, accepted AR's explanation for the 20 December 2023 exchange, and accepted that AR wrote on waiting list material in an attempt to help the claimant. The tribunal found no direct evidence of racism and accepted the respondent's witnesses' explanations that their actions were not related to the claimant's race.

The victimisation claim was in time, and the respondent accepted that the grievance lodged on 15 August 2024 was a protected act. The alleged detriment was delay in investigating that grievance. The tribunal found there had been considerable delay, but accepted the evidence that it resulted from RM not logging the grievance, RM's sickness absence and departure, reconstruction of his caseload from emails, witness sickness absence, diary availability and the festive period. It found the delay was not deliberate or contrived and was not because the claimant had done a protected act, so the victimisation claim was dismissed. Because all claims were unsuccessful, no ACAS Code uplift or other remedy was awarded.