Fatherly gesture results in employer facing harassment claim

It has been nearly a year since the duty to prevent sexual harassment came into force. The duty requires employers to take reasonable steps to prevent anyone – whether fellow colleagues, customers, suppliers or anyone else staff may come into contact with within the work context – from sexually harassing their staff. A recent case serves as a reminder to businesses that they must remain vigilant in addressing any potential sexual harassment.

The case concerned an employee, Ms Rankmore, who brought a complaint of sexual harassment against her employer. She complained that Mr Carlson, her line manager, would put one arm on her shoulder or around her back. Ms Rankmore acknowledged that it was a “fatherly type gesture” and she did not feel it was sexual but felt it was inappropriate in the workplace. She said that Mr Carlson would behave in the same way towards other people as well, something which was confirmed by the Operational Manager for HR Operations. Ms Rankmore said “I don’t think he realises he’s offending people”.

The company offered mediation, but this was declined by Ms Rankmore, although an informal resolution meeting took place. The company investigated Ms Rankmore’s complaints and upheld the complaint about her line manager putting his arm around her but found that he had not realised that it caused offence. Mr Carlson received further training in “emotional intelligence and management” and, along with other team members, participated in training on the law concerning sexual harassment.

Although Ms Rankmore’s claims failed because her claims were brought out of time, the Tribunal nevertheless made findings about the complaints given their serious nature. They said that even if her claims had been brought in time she would still not have won. Ultimately they found that Mr Carlson’s conduct was not of a sexual nature, nor did it specifically relate to Ms Rankmore’s sex given he had behaved in the same way towards other members of staff. As such, it did not have the purpose or effect of violating her dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for her.

This case demonstrates that even where behaviour is not sexual harassment, if it has the potential to be it can still land an employer in Tribunal - along all the cost and hassle that come with a Tribunal. 

Whilst the employer in this case reacted appropriately once a complaint was made, the one criticism which could perhaps be made is that the Operational Manager for HR Operations witnessed behaviour which had the potential to lead to a complaint, and seemingly did nothing to stop it. Taking steps to address concerns, even if perceived to be minor, could potentially avoid the cost and hassle of a Tribunal claim. 

If you have not yet acted to comply with the new duty or you need to address concerning behaviour by staff, you can get in touch here and we can help.