In Royal Bank of Scotland PLC v Morris the EAT agreed with a tribunal’s decision that a black employee, who complained about his manager’s conduct, suffered direct discrimination when a senior manager commented without any factual basis that his complaint was about race discrimination. The comment was humiliating and based on a stereotypical assumption, and a white employee complaining about a black colleague would not have been treated in the same way.
Mr Morris is black and of African-Caribbean ethnic origin. He raised a complaint about his manager, Mr Tighe, to Mr Tighe’s manager, Mr Arnett. At a meeting, Mr Arnett, without any foundation said something to the effect that he understood Mr Morris to be alleging that Mr Tighe’s conduct towards him was connected with his race. Mr Morris denied that he had made any such allegation. He resented what he understood to be the suggestion that he was “playing the race card”. Mr Morris’ subsequent grievance about Mr Tighe and Mr Arnett was dismissed. An employment tribunal upheld Mr Morris’ direct race discrimination claim. Mr Arnett’s comment that Mr Morris was suggesting that Mr Tighe’s conduct was racially motivated amounted to direct race discrimination. Mr Morris had said nothing to indicate that he was raising race as an issue, and Mr Arnett would not have made the same suggestion if a white employee was complaining about a black manager.
The EAT upheld the tribunal’s decision. Mr Arnett chose not to categorise Mr Morris’ complaint about Mr Tighe as a simple complaint by one colleague against another, but viewed it as a complaint by a black employee against a white manager. This was genuinely demeaning. In addition, the EAT rejected the employer’s argument that the race issued would have been raised by Mr Arnett if a white employee had complained of treatment by a black manager. Mr Arnett acted in the way he did because of a stereotypical assumption that the only reason, or possible reason, that a black employee is complaining about his treatment by a white colleague is because he is alleging race discrimination.
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.
