" "

Tribunal defends cross-dressing engineer

20 Jan 2021
by Sharma Solicitors
transgender discrimination employment lawyers

A landmark court ruling has boosted employment lawyers’ chances of protecting ‘sex change’ workers from harassment and unfair dismissal.

Birmingham Employment Tribunal ruled that a ‘gender fluid’ worker, Ms Rose Taylor, suffered direct discrimination, victimisation, harassment and constructive dismissal at Jaguar Land Rover Ltd.

Rose Taylor was in a process of changing from male to female from 2017 after starting work as an engineer 20 years ago.

Her performance was not an issue. Reviews of her work, including one before she lost her job, was that she was a ‘high performer and regarded as being very competent at her job’.

Yet, insults from colleagues began after Rose Taylor started wearing dresses and seeking to use female toilets. She went to work sometimes as male and other times as female as part of her transition.

She felt her employment rights were not adequately supported by her employer and left her job in June 2018. In September 2018, supported by employment lawyers, she lodged a case of constructive dismissal and breaches of the Equality Act.

Gender fluidity

The Tribunal rejected Jaguar Land Rover’s claim that people who identified as gender fluid or ‘non-binary’ were not protected under the Equality Act 2010. Jaguar were forced to pay £180,000, in settlement that did not include legal costs.

In a written judgement in December 2020, the Tribunal provided employment law advice on the relevance of Section 7(1) of the Equality, which protects employess undergoing a medical sex change operation. The Tribunal stated: ‘…in terms of gender reassignment, the intention was to make it clear that a person need not intend to have surgery, or indeed ever have surgery, in order to identify as a different gender to their birth.’

Rose had told her employer that she was suffering from mental stress due to harassment. This included insensitive remarks from colleagues such as asking her whether her female clothes were for Halloween and telling her she had ‘cracking legs’.

The Tribunal heard that in response to Rose’s complaints about abuse, Jaguar’s human resources said she should not be so sensitive, no allowances should be made concerning a dress code and she was asked ‘What do you want them to call you?’

Tagged

bullying business discrimination employees employment law Employment Tribunal equality

Related News Stories

Executive faced a ruined career after botched sacking

Executive faced a ruined career after botched sacking

An advanced mental health practitioner was recently awarded over £60,000 after he was sacked without a fair process. An employment…

Read more
CBI scandal: what if your employee is accused of a serious crime?

CBI scandal: what if your employee is accused of a serious crime?

The CBI has been rocked by accusations of rape and sexual misconduct. With its reputation in tatters, members leaving by…

Read more
F-words at work – OK, but saying ‘baldie’ – not

F-words at work – OK, but saying ‘baldie’ – not

Swearing at work was ruled acceptable by one employment tribunal judge, while another gave out £71,000 in compensation when a…

Read more
Employer punished for unfair sex assault dismissal

Employer punished for unfair sex assault dismissal

Government agency bosses used a flawed procedure when firing a top foreign envoy for a sexual harassment accusation. The British…

Read more
Employers face legal traps over home working

Employers face legal traps over home working

Employers risk making poor and costly decisions in response to employees asking to work from their homes. Two cases have…

Read more
Employers are punished for sacking bad workers

Employers are punished for sacking bad workers

A judge slapped down an employer who failed to follow a fair procedure when sacking a nurse for being racist.…

Read more
Managers’ confused performance assessment leads to big payout

Managers’ confused performance assessment leads to big payout

A well-known clothes store's flawed promotion and assessment process landed them with a £96,208 judgement at an employment tribunal. Bristol…

Read more
Frustrated manager’s decision leads to unfair dismissal

Frustrated manager’s decision leads to unfair dismissal

An employer lost an unfair dismissal case after summarily sacking an employee rather than go through a fair procedure. London…

Read more
Protected conversations expedite dismissals

Protected conversations expedite dismissals

The government has increased the scope for employers to sack employees without the threat of court cases. The new law…

Read more
Tesco gets burned by its fire and rehire tactics

Tesco gets burned by its fire and rehire tactics

A high street giant’s attempt to cut their staff bill was slapped down recently due to employment law. The High…

Read more
Government demands employees return to work  – but not just yet

Government demands employees return to work – but not just yet

Government have changed their advice on telling employees to return to the workplace due to a spike in virus infections.…

Read more
Job redundancy or unfair dismissal

Job redundancy or unfair dismissal

The looming end to the government’s job subsidies in November will lead to some cynical bosses using redundancy to victimise…

Read more
Sickness sacking is valid without medical expertise

Sickness sacking is valid without medical expertise

A rail company did not need extensive medical evidence to sack an employee for being too sick to work. Employment…

Read more
Court upholds sacking over a Christmas overtime row

Court upholds sacking over a Christmas overtime row

An employment tribunal in November 2016 decided that a company fairly dismissed a worker when her refusal to do overtime…

Read more
Good employer loses appeal in migrant right to work case

Good employer loses appeal in migrant right to work case

Foreign workers have a right to appeal if they face dismissal over doubts about their UK residency status, appeal judges…

Read more
Jaw-jaw before war-war

Jaw-jaw before war-war

New legislation compels people in a workplace dispute to talk before going into legal battle in a court. Whether they…

Read more

    Sharma Solicitors is Regulated by Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA Number: 403199)