City lawyer claims record £19m in sex discrimination case

Sam Jones
The Guardian,
Saturday April 19 2008

A City lawyer who was bullied and discriminated against because her boss “prefers the company of men and prefers working with them” is seeking a record £19m in damages from her former employers.

Gill Switalski, 51, left her £140,000-a-year job as head of the legal team at F & C Assets Management in September 2007 after her manager Marrack Tonkin criticised her for choosing a flexible working pattern, an employment appeal tribunal in London heard yesterday. This was so that she could balance her job with the care of her sons, one of who has cerebral palsy and the other Asperger’s syndrome, the tribunal was told.

“She had flexibility in place, but then Tonkin took over and things started to change,” said Suzanne McKie, representing Switalski. “The time she had off was in part a consequence of the difficulties with her sons … No one suggests she was not a capable lawyer and all her appraisals were fantastic.”

The tribunal heard that Switalski received an email from the company when her mother died, demanding a death certificate so that the cost of a cancelled business flight could be claimed on insurance. When she complained, “Mr Tonkin was dismissive about it”, said McKie. Switalski had not been allowed to join the all-male management committee despite her senior level. When she complained, she was told “to put up or shut up”.

It was also alleged that Tonkin took male members of staff out for lunch several times but only shared a plate of sandwiches with Switalski while he carried out her career review. “This is an individual who prefers the company of men and prefers working with them,” said McKie.

“She was a senior woman older than Mr Tonkin and he had a particular difficulty working with her in that position.”

The tribunal heard that Switalski went on sick leave after suffering a life threatening illness and undergoing two bouts of surgery. It was also told that she had not returned to work since last September and has to rely on her husband’s salary of less than £30,000. An employment tribunal has ruled Switalski was the victim of sex discrimination and harassment. F&C Assets challenged the decision, and the employment appeal tribunal yesterday reserved its judgment.

The previous compensation record for a sex discrimination case is thought to be the £6.5m won by the bond trader Allison Schieffelin from Morgan Stanley in 2004.

Tribunal backs worker who texted in sick

A SALES adviser sacked after he sent text messages to inform his employers he was taking time off and then failed to hand in a sick-note has been awarded almost £7,000 in compensation for unfair dismissal.

Mark Morrison, 36, of Haddington, took time off from tile shop Tile It All (UK) Ltd when he learned his brother was dying last December, an Edinburgh employment tribunal heard.

He called the store to say he would not be at work for two days as his brother’s condition had worsened.

When his brother died on 29 December, he sent a text message to his boss, Robert Selley, the firm’s area manager for Scotland, to advise him. He then sent another text to say he would be off sick until after the funeral.

Mr Morrison told the hearing Mr Selley then phoned and told him to bring a doctor’s certificate in to the shop when he returned. Mr Selley denied this.

Mr Morrison returned to work on 11 January and said that no comment was made when he handed in his sick-line.

But, the hearing learned, he could not cope with his grief and failed to attend work on 15 January.

Instead, he sent text messages to Carol Muir, manager of the shop in Edinburgh’s Seafield, on five consecutive days saying he was depressed and could not come to work. He also said he had been signed off work for two weeks by his doctor with depression.

But before he returned to the store, Mr Morrison received a letter summoning him to a disciplinary hearing for failure to follow company procedures for reporting sickness or absence.

At that disciplinary hearing, he produced his sick-line and denied he knew of any company policy insisting on phonecalls rather than text messages to report absences. He argued that a text had been acceptable when his brother had died and he pointed out he was told to bring in the certificate once he returned to work.

He further noted that he had spoken to Mr Selley about an unrelated matter during his absence and had not been made aware of any problem over the sick-line.

He was subsequently dismissed for failing to follow the company’s policy.

But yesterday the employment tribunal concluded his dismissal was unfair. A ruling issued by the tribunal noted he had not been disciplined or warned informally when he returned to work after his bereavement.

Susan O’Brien, the tribunal chairwoman, said the company’s complaint was petty, and the tribunal did not accept the claimant had been told he must not notify absences via text.

She said that throughout these events, Ms Muir, the local manager and Mr Selley were aware of the reason for the Mr Muir’s absence.

She continued: “The members of the tribunal were astonished that a local manager with only four or five employees to cover could not have phoned and asked for the GP certificate to meet any formal requirements.

“The description of this as deliberate ‘conduct’, meriting dismissal, in the unchallenged context of the claimant’s grief and distress is ridiculous. A modicum of common sense could have straightened all this out.”

Mr Morrison was awarded £6,977 in compensation.

Sting faces big fee after ex-chef wins unfair sacking claim

Sting could pay out record damages for unfairly dismissing his chef.

The singer – real name Gordon Sumner – and his wife Trudie Styler were judged to have broken employment laws by sacking Jane Martin, 41, last April.

In a unanimous verdict, it was ruled Martin was unfairly dismissed on the grounds of her pregnancy and was the victim of sexual discrimination.

Martin’s compensation payout will be decided at a hearing on 8 June. There is no limit on the amount awarded in sexual discrimination cases meaning Sting could be forced to pay record damages for a case involving a domestic servant.

Martin, who worked for the couple for eight years, said she was made to work 14-hour days despite being heavily pregnant.

Once, while seven months pregnant, she claimed she took a train and taxi from Salisbury to London to make soup and a salad for Styler.

She revealed she was also asked to travel to London on several occasions to cook a bowl of pasta for the couple’s youngest child – even though there were two nannies, a butler and two housekeepers in the London household

When Martin fell ill during her pregnancy and took time off work, Styler is alleged to have fumed: “Who the f**k does she think she is? She’s my chef in the UK. She needs to be available if I need her, or she should rethink her position.”

Martin was made redundant after being deemed to be worse than another chef when the pair were assessed on ability, length of service and attendance.

The tribunal described the “scoring” system as a
“sham” saying it was designed to ensure Martin couldn’t win.

Alleged sexual harassment spoils dismissal claim

A lorry loader has lost a compensation claim for unfair dismissal after the Birmingham Employment Tribunal heard allegations that he harassed a woman warehouse manager at a Worcester firm with sexual remarks. The alleged victim, Kate Taylor, was employed by TNT Logistics (UK) at Shire Park, Worcester. The Tribunal was told she was also upset when a magazine with sexual content and a thong were posted to her at work. Mark Elmes, of Kidderminster, had loaded vehicles at the Worcester depot for 20years with an unblemished record. He was accused of harassing Taylor with sexual innuendo and of sending her the magazine and thong. Elmes denied the allegations and alleged he was sacked for gross misconduct because he had raised issues about safety at the depot.He had repeatedly complained about pallets being stacked dangerously and left around in a manner likely to cause accidents the Tribunal heard that this had led the Health and Safety Executive to investigate. Elmes also alleged he had been picked on because he was a Transport & General Workers Union shop steward. During a six-day hearing, driver Jerry Sutton told the Tribunal: “Mark was stitched up because of his efforts to improve safety and because he was a shop steward.” Taylor, who did not give evidence at the hearing, had complained to the management about alleged harassment by Elmes. It was alleged that he made a remark about her cleavage and about the number 69 which was said to have sexual connotations.

The Tribunal was told that when a trailer was driven into the depot Elmes suggested that Taylor could drive the vehicle on his lap, or on the lap of another woman. After Elmes was accused of sending Taylor the magazine and thong he was suspended and eventually dismissed. He denied any involvement. Tribunal chairman Robert Powell said there was some concern about the way the firm had investigated the accusations, but overall the employer had acted within the bounds of reasonable responses. As a result he rejected Elmes’ compensation claim for unfair dismissal. However, he also rejected a claim for costs against Elmes by the firm, which has since sold its contracts business and is now known as Ceva Logistics.

Woman wins job back in age case

A 67-year-old hospital worker from Cornwall has won her job back in a “landmark” age discrimination claim. Clerical worker Ann Southcott was dismissed from Royal Cornwall Hospital in Truro in 2006, one day before age discrimination rules came into force.

Mrs Southcott’s union said the hospital trust had agreed to allow her to return and award her back pay from October. The trust settled out of court.

Mrs Southcott said she was delighted with the result.

She was dismissed aged 66, on 30 September, the day before the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations were introduced.

She was told she would receive 11 weeks’ pay rather than the 11 months’ pay she would have been entitled to if she had been dismissed one day later – on 1 October.

Mrs Southcott said: “I’m delighted with this result as I was clearly discriminated against on the grounds of my age, which was grossly unfair.

“I cannot afford to give up work at this time, and why should I when I was doing a job I loved?”

Unison, the health workers’ union, had planned to take the case to an employment tribunal. It said the “landmark victory” was a “fair and just outcome”.

A spokesman said: “I hope this decision will give new heart to other people who have lost their jobs because of their age.”

A new policy on age discrimination had been agreed with the Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust, he added.

Mrs Southcott will return to work in the therapies department at the hospital. The trust also agreed to provide any necessary training to enable her to carry out her duties.

They will review her employment on or after 1 April 2008 in line with service developments.

Trust chief executive John Watkinson said a small number of employees aged over 65 who had been dismissed last year would be returning to work.

Sting’s chef driven to tears

Sting’s private chef for eight years has won a claim for unfair dismissal and now is pursuing damages for alleged sexual discrimination against the singer and his wife.

Jane Martin, 41, alleges she often had to travel 160 kilometres to cook a bowl of pasta for Sting’s son, according to a statement made to an employment tribunal in the UK.

The Mail on Sunday says Ms Martin’s full statement to the tribunal states: “I was often required to travel all the way from Wiltshire to Central London just to cook their youngest son a bowl of pasta, even with two nannies, two housekeepers and a butler already in attendance who were perfectly capable of producing such a mundane offering.”

The paper reports that when Ms Martin was pregnant and sick with gastro-enteritis she alleged that Sting’s wife Trudi Styler shouted: “Who the f*** does she think she is? She’s my chef in the UK. She needs to be available if I need her, or she should rethink her position.”

Ms Martin said the celebrity couple never cooked for themselves and employed at least two chefs, with one running up a kitchen bill of £500,000 in one year.

“Sunday lunch would include roast beef, roast chicken, a vegetarian option, two different stuffings, ten different vegetables, two different gravies and two different puddings, purely to cater for individual tastes,” she says.

“I was once required to catch a train (while seven months pregnant) to London simply to produce a soup and salad for Trudi,” says Ms Martin.

“This was when she was on the set for production of Love Soup [a 2005 BBC drama]. The train and taxi amounted to £74 each way and the overtime was £300″ – a total of £448.

Ms Martin says she was paid £28,000 to work “very demanding” 14-hour days, which included dietary fads and producing 50 no-expense-spared Christmas hampers to send to the couple’s friends, including Prince Charles.

Although she admits the couple gave her lavish gifts, she says her dismissal was engineered after she got pregnant.

Her unfair dismissal claim has been upheld, but the tribunal has yet to rule on the allegation of sexual discrimination.

Administrator unfairly dismissed after boss died

A Walsall administrator who ran a haulage firm on her own for seven weeks without pay after her boss was found dead by his 12-year-old son has won a claim for unfair dismissal.

Stephanie Lawn told Birmingham Employment Tribunal how 49-year-old Michael Wathall, who was managing director of ML Transport in Cannock, died suddenly from a heart attack at his Walsall home last July.

“Wathall’s son went to kiss him shortly before going to school and discovered he was lying on the bedroom floor dead,” she added. “The boy had been living with his father since Wathall and his wife Lee divorced six months before.”Lawn was awarded £3,731 by the Tribunal for unfair dismissal, unpaid wages and holiday pay.

She said Wathall had been a successful haulier the firm delivered everything from pallets to envelopes in the UK and abroad.

“Wathall died only hours after driving back from Spain following a delivery,” Lawn reported. “I loved my job and carried on running the business from my home after the funeral, dealing with orders and making arrangements for the drivers.

“I wrote to Wathall’s ex-wife to try to find out what was happening about the business and my future, but didn’t receive a reply.

“After running the business for seven weeks and not hearing anything I presumed I’d lost my job.”

Tribunal chairman Charles Saunby said the business could not have carried on after Wathall’s death, and his ex-wife’s failure to respond meant Lawn had been made redundant.

He was satisfied that she had been unfairly dismissed through redundancy and said her award included a 50% loading because no proper disciplinary and dismissal procedures had been carried out.