A former Lidl employee has been awarded more than £22,000 in compensation for sex discrimination and victimisation due to the way the company handled her complaints about her manager’s behaviour.
Ms Callaghan, who was an assistant team manager at Lidl’s warehouse in Avonmouth, Bristol, alleged that the regional head of supply chain Mr Carter, made her feel uncomfortable on a team trip to Center Parcs in 2018 by holding her face with both hands and questioning her about why she was not going swimming.
She said she had to ask Carter three times to let go before he released her face. She left Center Parcs the following day, two days before the trip had been scheduled to end, as a result of his actions.
In a grievance letter in November 2018, Callaghan also alleged that Carter had called her “sneaky” for wearing a jacket in the office because there were coat hooks available. Employees were “fined” 10p, which went into a charity collection box, if they wore their coat at their desk. Callaghan said she did not want to use the coat hooks as she did not want colleagues to access any personal items in her pockets or have to walk across the room to access sanitary products from her coat or bag.
Sex discrimination
Discrimination against young women on the rise
Callaghan wore a leg brace to work while she awaited surgery on her knee. Carter was claimed to have said that he did not think anything was wrong with her knee, which led to her having to obtain a medical letter so he would stop questioning her.
She also claimed that Carter had called a pregnant colleague “fat”.
Callaghan’s grievance letter said: “I am raising this grievance as I feel like I have been consistently treated unfairly over the course of at least several months and had been subjected to shouting, exclusion, inappropriate offensive jokes, unwanted physical contact, intimidation, unreasonable criticism, undermining, blocking promotion, excessive workloads and non-cooperation.”
The grievance was dealt with by the regional director and regional head of HR. They interviewed Carter who denied pressuring anyone to go swimming and touching the claimant’s face, but said that he had had several drinks and had invited colleagues for a “group hug” and may have put his arm around her shoulders.
He said he had apologised for joking about the pregnant employee’s weight and said that the coat policy was “a bit of a joke and to raise money”.
He suggested that Callaghan had a vendetta against him and that she had struggled to fit into the team. Some of the colleagues interviewed by Clark also suggested that Callaghan had not gelled well with others.
One of those interviewed suggested that Carter had acted inappropriately at Center Parcs, dancing with some members of the team and not others, and that he had applied a “not unfair amount of pressure” on people to swim.
Her complaints were not upheld by Lidl, but a letter sent to Carter noted that he had fallen short of the standards expected of him concerning an incident where he had lost his temper and sworn at the claimant and the language used in connection with a ‘lighthearted’ awards ceremony. No sanction was applied but he had to take part in mediation with Callaghan.
Callaghan appealed against the result of the investigation, stating that she could not understand why the face-holding allegation had not been upheld, given that unwanted contact had been admitted. She also claimed that Carter had ignored her since the investigation was instigated.
A senior employment law consultant handled her appeal, and it was determined that Carter’s account of the Center Parcs incident was accurate and truthful and that Callaghan’s account should be rejected. Her appeal regarding the use of coat hooks was also dismissed.
Callaghan resigned from Lidl in March 2019.
However, at an employment tribunal in 2022, for which a compensation order has just been made, found that the employment law consultant had not made any further investigations about the Center Parcs incident and that, given the inconsistencies in Carter’s account and the fact the claimant did not accept contact had occurred as he suggested, it would have been necessary for the employer to explain the difference between the lawyer’s approach to the evidence of Carter and the claimant.
The judgment in Ms L Callaghan v Lidl Great Britain suggested this amounted to sex discrimination.
The tribunal also found the company had failed to make reasonable adjustments in respect of her knee injury because the grievance and mediation meetings were held in a building 500 metres away from her desk, or in London.
Her claim of victimisation relating to Carter ignoring Callaghan was upheld, but the tribunal rejected her claim of harassment related to disability.
A remedy judgment published recently shows that Callaghan has been awarded £22,006.01 in compensation, including £16,000 for injury to feelings.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Lidl has been contacted for a response.
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more human resources jobs
