Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Latest NewsEquality, diversity and inclusionSexual orientation discriminationAge discriminationSex discrimination

Discrimination case dismissed to avoid encouraging ‘culture of hyper-sensitivity’

by Ashleigh Webber 3 Aug 2021
by Ashleigh Webber 3 Aug 2021 Andy Paradise/Shutterstock
Andy Paradise/Shutterstock

A case in which a lawyer made dozens of discrimination and harassment complaints against a clinical research company has been dismissed by an employment tribunal because it did not want to encourage ‘a culture of hyper-sensitivity’.

Miss Sithirapathy, a former lawyer at PSI CRO UK, made 42 complaints against the company at the Reading employment tribunal, including unfair dismissal; wrongful dismissal; unauthorised deduction from wages; breach of contract; age discrimination; sex discrimination; victimisation; and harassment related to age, sex and sexual orientation.

In 2016, acting country manager Mr Schmidt offered the claimant a role at the company’s head office in Switzerland with a salary of 120,000 Swiss francs. He asked her how old she was and when she told him she was 27, he is alleged to have said “your age will prevent you from commanding a higher salary”.

Sithirapathy declined the job offer at that point for personal reasons. Schmidt is said to have asked what those personal reasons were and is alleged to have stated: “You are not married, you don’t have children and you do not have a boyfriend”. He is also said to have told the claimant an anecdote about the Swiss office’s “tolerance” of a lesbian employee.

Recent discrimination cases

Up to claimants to provide discrimination evidence, Supreme Court rules

Male directors win sex discrimination case following ad agency’s ’embarrassing’ gender pay gap

Salesperson asked ‘can I get you pregnant?’ wins sex discrimination claim

The claimant told the tribunal that she was shocked by the comments and did not know how Schmidt knew this personal information about her. Schmidt told the tribunal that he had been trying to explain that sexuality or other personal circumstances were not an issue for the company, and the tribunal accepted that although what he said was “clumsy”, it came with good intention.

In late 2016 she applied for a promotion to senior legal counsel level and was told by head of legal, Ms Ruf, that she was not ready for a promotion as she was not performing at the same level as the three people who held a senior legal counsel role. This was repeated at an appraisal in March 2017, in which she was told she was still young so should not expect a promotion yet. Sithirapathy complained that she had been discriminated against because of her age.

In May 2017 she was offered a new, non-legal, role with parent company PSI CRO AG in Switzerland, beginning in September of that year.

Her employment at the UK arm of PSI was terminated shortly before she took up her role in Switzerland. The tribunal was satisfied that this was not actioned in order to prevent her from having continuous service in her new role in Switzerland.

The claimant moved to Switzerland on 4 September 2017 but was dismissed in October 2017 due to a reorganisation of the team. She enquired about whether she could return to her legal counsel role in the UK but was told this was not possible as the job had already been filled.

After her dismissal from PSI CRO AG, the claimant brought a case in the Cantonal Court of Zug, Switzerland, which found the decision had not breached Swiss law.

The UK employment tribunal found that her complaints of wrongful and unfair dismissal could not succeed because she was not dismissed from the UK company – the contract came to an end by mutual agreement.

The complaints of sex, sexual orientation and age discrimination were also dismissed, along with claims of unlawful harassment and breach of contract.

Employment judge Emma Hawksworth said: “The comments [made by Mr Schmidt] were unfortunate and awkward. However, we bear in mind the importance of not encouraging a culture of hyper-sensitivity or of imposing legal liability to every unfortunate phrase.

“We have concluded that, in this case, taking into account the context of the discussion, these comments did not cross the line such that they amounted to unlawful harassment.”

The judge also found the claimant had not been treated unfavourably at her appraisal, “The same comments would have been made to someone who was at the same career stage as the claimant, whatever their age. Using the words ‘still young’ in this context was another way of saying that the claimant was at the beginning of her professional career and was not a detriment to the claimant.”

Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today


Browse more human resources jobs

Ashleigh Webber
Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is editor at OHW+ and HR and wellbeing editor at Personnel Today. Ashleigh's areas of interest include employee health and wellbeing, equality and inclusion and skills development. She has hosted many webinars for Personnel Today, on topics including employee retention, financial wellbeing and menopause support. Prior to joining Personnel Today in 2018, she covered the road transport sector for Commercial Motor and Motor Transport magazines, touching on some of the employment and wellbeing issues experienced by those in road haulage.

previous post
XpertHR acquires pay analysis provider Gapsquare
next post
Lib Dems call for furlough commission to avoid unemployment crisis

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

UK in urgent need of female tradespeople finds...

17 Jun 2022

Google to pay $118m to settle equal pay...

15 Jun 2022

Wording of diversity statements critical to policies’ success

10 Jun 2022

Women’s promotions at financial services firms lag behind

30 May 2022

Menopausal worker loses sex and disability discrimination claim

27 May 2022

Bald move: Tribunal was right in sex-related harassment...

17 May 2022

Police Scotland pays out £948,000 to female officer...

16 May 2022

Maya Forstater: What is a woman?

10 May 2022

Robin Moira White: What is a woman?

10 May 2022

Twice as many men as women hold company...

3 May 2022
  • NSPCC revamps its learning strategy with child wellbeing at its heart PROMOTED | The NSPCC’s mission is to prevent abuse and neglect...Read more
  • Diversity versus inclusion: Why the difference matters PROMOTED | It’s possible for an environment to be diverse, but not inclusive...Read more
  • Five steps for organisations across the globe to become more skills-driven PROMOTED | The shift in the world of work has been felt across the globe...Read more
  • The future of workforce development PROMOTED | Northumbria University and partners share insight...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2022

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2022 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Equality, diversity and inclusion
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
    • OHW Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+