" "

Managers’ confused performance assessment leads to big payout

6 Jul 2022
by Sharma Solicitors

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

Bristol employment tribunal upheld the claim of 56-year-old knitwear designer Rachel Sunderland that Superdry Plc discriminated against her because of her age and subjected her to unfair dismissal.

Rachel Sunderland was a respected specialist from September 2015 until her resignation in September 2020. She became distressed after younger, less experienced employees were promoted over her and how she was treated by Superdry managers.

After a five-day hearing, the employment tribunal accepted that Rachel Sunderland’s resignation amounted to unfair dismissal. They agreed that a fundamental aspect of her employment contract, mutual trust and confidence between employer and employee, had been breached.

Performance assessment

Managers assessed Rachel’s performance using a colour scheme but also used terms such as ‘great’. The tribunal regarded this as confusing and for instance could not understand why an employee was ‘great’ rather than ‘brilliant’.

Managers assessed Rachel as ‘great’ but did not promote her because of her alleged lack of leadership experience. Yet, the same managers promoted others whose leadership experience was similar to Rachel. Despite that, managers gave Rachel the work of two employees on the basis that they had faith in her design skills.

Rachel gave unchallenged evidence to the tribunal that she was responsible for designing a Superdry range of men’s knitwear. The sales for that range had been falling but her designs increased sales by 63%, and led to further growth in following years. The tribunal found that Rachel was an excellent knitwear designer.

The tribunal was shocked at the complacency of the company’s head of the creative centre, Jo Cottrell. She said the design management team decided on promotions and their promotion criteria removed any risk of bias.

Employment tribunal decisions

Due to her promotion disappointment and how she was treated, she became ill, felt humiliated and resigned.

In the judgment of the three-person tribunal panel, they stated:

But we do find that for the other reasons we have identified, the Claimant (Rachel Sunderland) was treated less favourably. The Claimant was not promoted, saw her workload significantly increased, and was offered minimal and ineffectual assistance to cope with this workload…

“We find that the Respondent did this in significant part because of the Claimant’s age…We do not accept the reasons advanced by the Respondent (Superdry) for not promoting the Claimant (Rachel Sunderland). The Respondent’s criteria for promotion were flawed: they left undefined what key elements of the criteria were and used ambiguous if not positively misleading terminology. We find that the Respondent’s decision-makers – principally Ms Cottrell and Mr Harvey – have sought to use these criteria to justify a refusal to promote the Claimant that does not stand up on its own terms.”

Tagged

age discrimination constructive dismissal Employment Tribunal Equality Act performance assessment unfair dismissal

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
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
Tribunal defends  cross-dressing engineer

Tribunal defends cross-dressing engineer

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

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)