In the case of Mr O J v Trenitalia C2C Limited Mr OJ, claimed he was unfairly dismissed due to “direct race discrimination” by the south Essex rail firm after being fired from his job as a customer service assistant in 2022.
Mr OJ was accused of attempting to “slap a child” while working by two subcontracted security guards who witnessed the incident.
Both reported seeing “an unprovoked attack” by the claimant and urged c2c to look into the “very serious matter” which was captured on CCTV.
The report stated: “The tribunal have viewed this footage a number of times.
“The teenager plays with the turntable on the counter and then plays with the card machine. The claimant speaks to the teenager and at one point waves him away from the counter, gesturing for the teenager to leave.
“The claimant had left the ticket office and walked along the platform side of the ticket barrier.
“He approached the ticket barrier and almost immediately, swiped with his open hand as if to slap the teenager, but did not make contact as the teenager quickly stepped back out of the way. In this single action the claimant had lent across the barrier and appeared to have forcefully lashed out at the teenager.”
c2c interviewed the claimant explaining the allegation was being investigated, and when asked “at any point did you intend to strike him” the claimant said he “didn’t recall the incident”.
Mr OJ was then suspended on full pay whilst the investigation was being completed.
He also claimed he had been “subjected to race discrimination” by the two security guards on May 10, 2022.
But the tribunal panel found they “would have responded to someone who was not a black African person in exactly the same way as they responded” to Mr Johnson.
A security guard said if there had been a heated discussion with the teenager, he would have stepped in as it was his role to protect the c2c staff “but the claimant came out and attacked the boy”.
Employment Judge Laura Howden-Evans concluded c2c acted “reasonably” in firing Mr OJ.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
