In the recent case of Finn v British Bung Manufacturing Company Ltd and Mr King, an employment tribunal has found that a male employee called ‘bald’ at work during an argument with his supervisor suffered from harassment related to sex.
Mr Finn, who had worked for the business for nearly 24 years, had a heated exchange with his supervisor, Mr King. During the row, he was called ‘bald’ followed by an expletive. After he was dismissed for gross misconduct, Mr Finn brought a number of claims against his former employer and was successful in his claims for wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal and sex-related harassment. Of particular interest is the claim for sex-related harassment, which was also brought against Mr King.
The tribunal held that Mr King’s comment was unwanted conduct, and that he had intended to violate the claimant’s dignity and created a degrading, hostile, offensive or intimidating environment for Mr Finn. It therefore met the definition of harassment.
The question was then whether or not calling him ‘bald’ was related to his gender, in order to qualify as sex-related harassment. Viewers of the 2022 Oscars ceremony will be well aware that hair loss isn’t only a male problem. The tribunal, however, held that although both men and women can be bald, baldness is typically associated with males and is much more prevalent in men than in women. Thus, there was a connection between ‘bald’ and Mr Finn’s sex, which is a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. As a result, the tribunal found that Mr Finn had been harassed on the grounds of his sex.
The case has attracted a lot of media attention but given the remark made was clearly offensive in light of the use of an expletive in conjunction with the word ‘bald’, it is unsurprising that the tribunal was inclined to find in Mr Finn’s favour. The use of the word ‘bald’ on its own might have produced a different verdict.
For more information on how our employment legal services work, check out our dedicated page.
