Workplace Banter May Be Fine, But Not If it Tips Over Into Harassment

A certain amount of foul-mouthed banter is only to be expected in a robust working environment. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, however, employers who allow it to tip over into hostile and discriminatory abuse are likely to pay a high financial and reputational price.

The…

Mar 03, 2022

Goh rhy yan ud0twv98uvg unsplash 1024x768

A certain amount of foul-mouthed banter is only to be expected in a robust working environment. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, however, employers who allow it to tip over into hostile and discriminatory abuse are likely to pay a high financial and reputational price.

The case concerned a white worker, aged in his early 50s, who was employed by a tyre recycling company. He worked as part of a small team in which white people were in a minority. He said that a younger black colleague had subjected him to verbal abuse, amongst other things referring to him as an old, white guy. He asserted that it was that abuse which led to him taking a period off sick with depression. He eventually resigned and launched ET proceedings.

Ruling on the matter, the ET acknowledged that it is possible for two men in a tough working environment to use abusive language to each other without any bad feeling. There is always a risk that such behaviour will tip over into bullying and aggression, however, and that is what had happened in this case. Although the man had himself used some bad language, he was essentially standing up for himself.

He had raised concerns about bullying with his boss, but nothing had been done beyond having a quiet word. There were indications that the boss had minimised his concerns and sided with the younger worker. In his resignation letter, the man said that the abuse had caused him stress, sleepless nights and loss of appetite. To maintain his own sanity, he felt that he could not return to work.

Upholding his harassment claim, the ET found that the age- and race-related abuse he endured created a hostile and intimidating working environment for him. In also ruling that he was constructively unfairly dismissed, the ET was satisfied that the harassment triggered his resignation. The company was ordered to pay him £7,486 for unfair dismissal and £14,541 in respect of discrimination, a total of £22,027.

The 2026 Legal Update: Employment Rights Act 2025 - What Every SME Needs to Know

The Employment Rights Act 2025 represents one of the most significant reforms to UK employment law in recent years. As key provisions come into force throughout 2026, employers should carefully review their existing practices to ensure alignment with the new statutory framework. These legislative changes introduce additional obligations for employers and enhanced protections for employees. For SMEs in particular, the practical and financial implications require early consideration and…

Coastguard Volunteer a ‘Worker’ When Performing Paid Activities

A person who performs a voluntary role may nonetheless meet the definition of a ‘worker’ under Section 230(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, depending on the individual circumstances. Recently, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruled that a man who volunteered for the Coastguard Rescue Service (CRS) was a worker when performing activities for which he was entitled to claim payment. The man had held voluntary roles within the CRS since 1985. After he was invited to a disciplinary hearing,…

Age Discrimination, Redundancy and the Burden of Proof – Guideline Ruling

Where an older employee is treated less favourably than a younger one in a similar position, the burden shifts onto the employer to prove that age discrimination had no effect on its decision-making. An Employment Tribunal (ET) made that point in the case of an administration manager who was made redundant at the age of 67. The man had worked for a car sales company for more than 20 years when he was selected for redundancy. He contended that his dismissal was pre-determined and motivated by…