David Stephenson secures £1m payout for victim of racial bias
David Stephenson acted for Mr Hastings, an IT specialist, who won his case against King's College Hospital NHS Trust (KCH) for race discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Facts:
Richard Hastings was dismissed after 20 years' impeccable service following an altercation with a third-party van driver who had been delivering goods to one of the units on KCH’s premises. During their exchange of words, Mr Hastings was subjected to verbal and racial abuse. He accepted that at some time during the exchange the van driver placed his hand on his forearm and when he lifted his arm to extricate himself, he made contact with the van drivers face. Mr Hastings denied striking him. He became concerned and reported the incident to KCH security before leaving. Mr Hastings was suspended and dismissed following an investigation which was largely based on CCTV footage of the incident. He was accused of being the aggressor. His complaints of race discrimination were not investigated. Mr Hastings contended that his employer was overly reliant on CCTV evidence at the expense of other material which was in his favour and made snap judgements based on incomplete information. He complained that the suspension, investigation and dismissal were tainted by subconscious racial bias and as a result he was treated as the aggressor.
Employment Tribunal
The ET upheld Mr Hastings complaints for race discrimination and unfair dismissal. The ET found that the investigation and subsequent dismissal was tainted by unconscious racial bias. It identified several disturbing features concerning the investigating officer’s conduct including the white complainants being referred to as “victims; his failure to investigate Mr Hasting’s serious complaints of racial abuse; his acceptance without question what the complainants had said about Mr Hastings and his conclusion that the CCTV evidence corroborated what the complainants had reported, even though that was not the case. The ET found that the investigatory report was worded in a way that called into question the veracity of Mr Hastings’s evidence and failed to accurately record that an act of assault had been committed by the complainant first. The ET found that the investigating officer materially influenced the decision to dismiss but showing the dismissing officer what he considered to be the ‘relevant parts’ of the CCTV to her when they were alone. This meeting was not documented and was not mentioned in either of their witness statements. Accordingly, the ET found that the dismissal amounted to direct race discrimination and was unfair.
A copy of the remedy judgment can be found by clicking here.
Read more: http://www.voice-online.co.uk/article/it-expert-wins-dismissal-case-following-racist-attack
