Curbing Discriminatory ‘Banter’ in the Workplace Melvyna Mumunie Speaks to Ignites Europe about EAT Ruling on Baldness Insult
Melvyna Mumunie, Senior Associate at Cole Khan, spoke last week to Ignites Europe’s Robert Van Egghen about the implications of a recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision on unlawful harassment on grounds of sex in the workplace.
Introduction
In a 2023 ruling reconsidered by Robert Van Egghen in a recent article for Ignites Europe, the Leeds Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) decided to uphold a finding that the use of offensive and abusive language about an employee’s baldness amounted to unlawful harassment on grounds of sex.
The Case: Finn v British Bung Manufacturing Company [2023] EAT 165
The claimant, an electrician with balding, contended that he had suffered harassment related to sex after his supervisor called him a “bald c***” during a dispute while working for the British Bung Company in 2021. The issue for the court’s consideration was whether an insult using the term “bald” was specifically related to the claimant’s sex, a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.
Refuting the employer’s argument that “baldness” is not exclusive to a particular gender and, therefore, unrelated to the claimant’s sex, the court upheld the lower tribunal’s decision, ruling that the derogatory use of the word “bald” amounted to unlawful harassment on grounds of sex, as “baldness is more prevalent in men”.
Melvyna Mumunie on Curbing Derogatory Workplace Banter
In her comment for Europe Ignites, Cole Khan’s Melvyna Mumunie emphasised that the outcome exposes workplaces in which, “there might be a high level of office banter” to greater exposure to and liability in worker harassment and discrimination claims, “the comment does not even have to be directed at an individual for that individual to feel their dignity has been violated.”
As the Worker Protection Act 2023 comes into force this month, imposing a new duty on employers to positively protect workers from sexual harassment in the workplace, Europe Ignites’ revisitation of Finn v British Bung Manufacturing Company comes at a critical juncture in the broader development of legislative and judicial responses to bullying, harassment, and toxic work cultures. Reflecting on this dynamic, Melvyna Mumunie noted that, “something that might have been normalised in the past is not okay now.”
Whether the ruling opens the door to more lenient conceptions of what constitutes a “gendered characteristic” remains to be seen, but Finn v British Bung Manufacturing Company provides a firm reminder that sex discrimination extends to encompass men, and that – as workplaces continue to positively diversify – ‘lad culture’ cloaked as dogmatic ‘office banter’ should not be given a pass by employers.
For further analysis on this issue, you can read Robert Van Egghen’s article for Ignites Europe, here. The EAT’s ruling can be accessed on the .GOV.UK website, here.