An employment tribunal has found that a line manager with a “predilection for innuendo” did not commit sexual harassment against a female employee when she witnessed him recreating a scene from the film Ghost with another man. Stephen Simpson rounds up employment tribunal decisions reported in the past week.
Sexual harassment: case law
Witnessing line manager’s recreation of scene from film Ghost at office party was not sexual harassment
The employment tribunal in this case had the unusual task of deciding whether or not a female employee was sexually harassed when she witnessed her male line manager and another man re-enacting a “sexually suggestive” scene from the film Ghost at an office party.
While the tribunal found that this incident was not harassment under the Equality Act 2010, the employer was ordered to pay the claimant £2,000 for several other incidents that displayed her line manager’s liking for sexual innuendo, and to reimburse £1,200 in tribunal fees to the claimant.
The employment tribunal held that the line manager committed sexual harassment against the claimant when he made comments about her cleavage and said that she should wear a short skirt and low-cut top when pitching to a potential client.
Other tribunal decisions in the headlines
Kate Middleton’s former police officer wins unfair dismissal case against the Met
A decorated police officer who guarded Kate Middleton has returned to work after winning an unfair dismissal complaint, the Mirror reports.
Inverness fiscal sacked after car crash wins case for unfair dismissal
A former Inverness fiscal who was sacked after causing a crash which nearly killed her has won her case for unfair dismissal, according to the Press and Journal.
Parking switch sacking “unfair”, decides tribunal judge
An employment judge has ruled that a council officer was unfairly dismissed for his part in a parking contract debacle, reports the Brighton Argus.
Worthing Borough Council officers knew of NCP contract errors
A senior council officer unfairly dismissed after an “inadequate” investigation into his involvement in a flawed parking contract did not act alone, says West Sussex Gazette.