press release splash

Clarke Willmott

PROTECT YOURSELF FROM HARASSMENT ACCUSATIONS, CLARKE WILLMOTT WARNS EMPLOYERS

Employers are at an increased risk of becoming involved in expensive tribunal cases if they do not clearly outline to their workforce the difference between light-hearted banter and harassment in the workplace. 

This warning comes following the recent case of a married, heterosexual man who took his employers to an Employment Tribunal after his colleagues taunted him with homophobic comments.

Mike Wilson, head of employment law at national law firm Clarke Willmott, said: “Crucially, the Court of Appeal ruled that it was irrelevant that the man’s colleagues knew he was not in fact gay because the taunts themselves created a hostile and degrading working environment.

“The message here is that is now a matter of what is said, not why is it said.”

According to the law, harassment is “unwanted conduct that has the purpose or effect of violating a person’s dignity or creating an offensive, intimidating or hostile environment”. 

Legislation protects employees from harassment if it occurs on the grounds of various characteristics such as race, religion, sex, age and in this case, sexual orientation. 

It is important to be aware that it is not always necessary for an employee to face repeated taunts to establish harassment.  “A single isolated comment may be sufficient', said Mike Wilson. “And cases can be brought where employees are perceived as having the stereotypical characteristics of a group even when they do not belong to that group. When considering employment cases, judges consider what has been said and its effects on the victim as being more important than the reasons why it was said.”

Employers can, and frequently are, found to be liable for the conduct of their staff. It is therefore essential for employers to put policies in place to ensure that employees are made aware that discrimination, on whatever grounds, will not be tolerated in the workplace. 

Mike Wilson points out that harassment policies should provide examples of what does not constitute acceptable behaviour and should set out what sanctions will be taken if members of staff are found to have harassed others.  Training should also be provided on how to deal with harassment.

He added: “Employers should revisit their policies to ensure that the line between an acceptable, light-hearted comment and harassment is clearly spelt out. Immediate legal advice should be sought if employers are in any doubt.”

Picture caption: Mike Wilson, head of employment law at Clarke Willmott

ENDS  20th May 2009

For further information please contact Louie Hadley, Sturgess Van Damme, 01275 349011 or email louie@sturgessvandamme.co.uk