Nurse Victimised for Whistleblowing Receives Substantial Compensation

Workplace whistleblowing is an act of good citizenship and the law frowns deeply on employers who fail to respond appropriately. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in awarding substantial compensation to an NHS nurse who complained of racism and bullying on the ward where she…

Mar 18, 2021

Adhy savala zbpgmge27p8 unsplash 1024x640

Workplace whistleblowing is an act of good citizenship and the law frowns deeply on employers who fail to respond appropriately. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in awarding substantial compensation to an NHS nurse who complained of racism and bullying on the ward where she worked.

The nurse complained to her manager that junior colleagues were being bullied and that staff on the ward had formed into cliques, divided by race. She also asserted that racial factors were affecting the allocation of work. She identified as white and did not raise those concerns in her private interest. She acted as a good citizen due to her fervent belief that race discrimination is wrong and that the hospital had a public equality duty to uphold.

Given the seriousness and sensitivity of the allegations, she was told not to discuss them on the open ward. After emotions ran high amongst staff, she was accused of disobeying that instruction and was restricted from working on the ward. As she was only qualified to practise on that ward, she was effectively restricted from working at the hospital altogether.

After she took action against the NHS trust that ran the hospital, the ET found that she had suffered victimisation and had been subjected to detrimental treatment for whistleblowing. Contrary to the aims of the trust’s own whistleblowing policy, it was a classic case of an employer treating a person who had raised allegations far too severely because they had done so.

There was no adequate evidence that she had disobeyed the instruction not to talk about her concerns on the ward. Following an incident in the hospital’s car park, in which a colleague blocked her path in a hostile manner, the trust failed to investigate the matter. Allegations that turmoil and disruption amongst staff had justified her restriction from the ward were exaggerated. There was also an inexcusable delay in informing her of the outcome of an internal investigation into her conduct.

The nurse was awarded £26,083 in compensation, including £15,000 for injury to her feelings. The ET also recommended that, within four weeks of its decision being circulated, the restriction on her working on the ward should be lifted.

Company That Labelled Employees as Self-Employed Receives Comeuppance

Many businesses that persist in labelling their employed staff as self-employed have met their comeuppance during the COVID-19 pandemic. That was certainly so in the case of a company that was ordered to pay compensation of more than £50,000 to a woman who was sacked after asserting her colleagues’ employment rights. The company ran a beauty salon at which the woman was engaged to work as PA to the founder and to provide treatments. Her contract was labelled as a consultancy agreement. When the…

Gender-Critical Beliefs Entitled to Legal Protection – Test Case Ruling

A person’s philosophical beliefs may be viewed as wrong and offensive by some, but that does not exclude them from protection under the law. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in a unique test case concerning a think tank researcher who believed that sex is immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity. The woman considered that statements such as ‘woman means adult human female’ and ‘trans women are male’ are statements of neutral fact that are not transphobic and…

ET Upholds Supermarket Worker’s Sexual Harassment Complaint

Those who endure the crushing experience of sexual harassment in the workplace owe it to themselves to seek legal redress. The point was made by the case of a supermarket worker who found herself immersed in a ‘man’s world’ where sexualised comments and behaviour went unchecked. The promising teenager, who worked for a supermarket chain for about two and a half years, achieved swift promotion to shift manager. Following her resignation, however, she launched Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings…