Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Tribunal WatchBullying and harassmentDismissalUnfair dismissal

Dismissed worker argued racist term was “street talk”

by Stephen Simpson 9 Jun 2016
by Stephen Simpson 9 Jun 2016

An employment tribunal held that an employee was fairly dismissed after using a racist term at work, despite his arguments that he did so in front of white colleagues only and that he was using “street talk”. Stephen Simpson rounds up recent tribunal decisions.

Fair dismissal for use of racist term heard by white colleagues only
In Mann v NSL Ltd, the employment tribunal held that an employer fairly dismissed an employee for using a racist term in the workplace. It was unimpressed with the claimant’s arguments that he did not realise anyone was listening, did not intend to offend, nor that the word is “street talk” where he lives.

Workplace racism: the tribunal’s view

“The way in which the respondent reasonably believed the claimant had used the word was highly offensive. It was clearly in breach of the respondent’s diversity and equality policy.

“The facts that the claimant may not have intended to offend and offered some apology do not mean that it was not open to the reasonable employer to dismiss…

“Equally the fact that the comments were made in the presence of only white people does not mean the dismissal was outside the band of reasonable responses.”

During a conversation with three white male colleagues, ambulance care assistant Mr Mann used the phrase “n****r girl” to describe someone with whom he had played darts.

When challenged by a white female colleague who overheard, Mr Mann is alleged to have responded: “why, that’s what she is”.

The colleague subsequently reported Mr Mann to management.

Mr Mann was dismissed, despite his arguments that:

  • he uses the word as “local street talk” and not in a racist way;
  • he did not realise that anyone was listening; and
  • dismissal was a disproportionate sanction.

Mr Mann’s employment tribunal claim for unfair dismissal was rejected.

The employment tribunal noted that, while there may be room for debate about whether or not the word can be used in some circumstances without causing offence, the use of the word in these circumstances was highly offensive.

The tribunal held that the employer had acted on its reasonable belief following an adequate investigation that Mr Mann had used a racist term in breach of the employer’s diversity and equality policy.

The employment tribunal highlighted that it did not matter that Mr Mann had not realised that someone else was listening nor that he did not mean to offend anyone.

Equally, it made no difference to the tribunal that the comments were made in the presence of white people only.

Read more details of the case and practical tips in the light of the judgment…

 

Racism in the workplace: FAQ

If a white employee makes racist comments in the presence of other white employees only, could this be regarded as racial harassment?

Other tribunal decisions in the headlines

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Sara Netanyahu found guilty of “abusive” treatment of employee
Sara Netanyahu, the wife of Israel’s Prime Minister, was found guilty of “abusive” and “humiliating” treatment of a former employee, says the Telegraph.

Consulate fined £2000 for discriminating against mother during job interview
The Japanese Consulate in Edinburgh has been hit with a hefty tribunal award after losing an employment tribunal case for discriminating against a woman during a job interview, reports the Scottish National.

Stephen Simpson

Stephen Simpson is Principal HR Strategy and Practice Editor at Brightmine. His areas of responsibility include the policies and documents and law reports. After obtaining a law degree and training to be a solicitor, he moved into publishing, initially with Butterworths. He joined Brightmine in its early days in 2001.

previous post
Will the Government’s planned restaurant tips law end unfair tipping practices?
next post
National living wage: extra age band encourages discrimination

You may also like

HR manager with ‘messy’ work loses discrimination case

25 Jun 2025

Man who used company credit card for himself...

23 Jun 2025

BBC Breakfast bullying and misconduct allegations under investigation

20 Jun 2025

Barts nurse told to remove watermelon image claims...

19 Jun 2025

Date set for X’s appeal against unfair dismissal...

18 Jun 2025

WFH employee who falsified timesheets loses unfair dismissal...

16 Jun 2025

Sleeping security officer wins £20k for unfair dismissal

16 Jun 2025

Lawyers warn over impact of Employment Rights Bill...

13 Jun 2025

Facilities firms share ‘deep concerns’ on workers’ rights

4 Jun 2025

NDA ban vital to tackling misogyny in music...

4 Jun 2025

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...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 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • 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
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+