Repeatedly Misnaming Employee Ruled as Race Harassment by Employment Rights Tribunal in the UK

 

A recent employment tribunal in the UK has ruled that repeatedly misnaming an employee can be considered racial harassment. This case involves Viveak Taneja, a British Indian bathroom salesman, who was awarded £9,329.23 for injury to feelings due to race harassment by his sales director, Dana Davies.

Case Overview

Viveak Taneja was employed as an area sales manager for Phoenix Whirlpools in London starting in June 2021. In March 2022, Dana Davies was hired as the sales director. The two scheduled time together on March 21 and 22, 2022, for Davies to assess Taneja's capabilities and identify any necessary support.

Taneja was to pick up Davies from King’s Cross at 8:45 am on March 21. However, Taneja arrived late due to having to do the school run, arriving around 9:05 am. This initial meeting set a negative tone for their interaction, with Davies becoming irritated by Taneja's lateness.

During the car journey, Davies misnamed Taneja twice, calling him "Vikesh." Taneja corrected him both times, but Davies did not apologize. Davies, who has dyslexia, did not disclose this to Taneja at the time.

The situation escalated when they stopped at a McDonald's to discuss work. Davies again misnamed Taneja twice more. Frustrated and upset, Taneja decided to leave, calling Davies an "idiot" and a "racist," and asking him to remove his belongings from the car. Davies then blocked Taneja's car and threatened termination if Taneja drove away, which he did regardless.

The Claim

Taneja contacted his chief operating officer (COO) to confirm his employment status and was instructed to email his account of the incident. Davies also submitted his account, which the COO accepted, leading to Taneja's dismissal without further investigation. Taneja claimed unfair dismissal, racial discrimination, and harassment. However, the tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim due to Taneja's employment being under two years and ruled that Davies's questioning was part of his management style.

The Defense

Davies argued that his misnaming was not intentional and attributed it to his dyslexia, which affects his ability to remember and pronounce names. This defense was partially acknowledged but did not absolve the impact of his actions on Taneja.

The Decision

The tribunal found that Davies's repeated misnaming of Taneja violated his dignity and created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, and offensive environment. Employment Judge Cowen ruled that the misnaming was directly related to Taneja’s race, as his name has a specific cultural significance.

The tribunal emphasized that racial harassment does not need to be intentional to be unlawful. The unwanted behavior of misnaming Taneja was enough to constitute harassment.

Racial Harassment Defined

Under the Equality Act 2010, racial harassment is defined as unwanted conduct related to a person's race that has the purpose or effect of violating their dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. In this case, the tribunal ruled that Davies's repeated misnaming of Taneja met this definition.

Key Takeaways

1. Repeated Misnaming Can Be Racial Harassment:

   Misnaming someone repeatedly, even if unintentional, can constitute racial harassment if it affects the individual's dignity and creates a hostile environment.

2. Cultural Significance Matters:

   Names that have cultural or racial significance need to be respected, and failure to do so can lead to legal consequences.

3. Unintentional Actions Can Still Be Unlawful:

   Harassment does not have to be intentional to be considered unlawful. Employers and employees alike must be aware that their actions, even if unintended, can have serious implications.

4. Importance of Apology and Correction:

   When corrected about a mistake, such as misnaming, an immediate apology and effort to remember the correct name can prevent escalation of the situation.

5. Need for Equality and Diversity Training:

   Employers should ensure all managers and staff undergo equality and diversity training to understand the importance of respectful and inclusive behavior in the workplace.

6. Employer Responsibilities in Harassment Cases:

   Employers must take harassment claims seriously, conducting thorough investigations rather than relying on a single account, to ensure fair treatment of all employees.

By implementing these practices, businesses can promote a positive, inclusive working environment and avoid potential legal issues related to racial harassment.