The complainant encountered a malfunction with the till in the restaurant during a particularly busy period.  The manager on duty could not fix it so the complainant, on her own initiative, went to another restaurant which used the same type of till.  She received a call from the respondent later that evening shouting at her for bringing an outsider into his business.  The complainant described how the respondent was verbally abusive to all staff on a regular basis without cause and that he generally acted in the manner of a bully.

The respondent neither made a submission to the Tribunal nor attended the hearing.  The Equality Officer accepted the complainant as a credible witness and that she had been mistreated at work.  He went on “However, the complainant has failed to offer any evidence linking the unwanted behaviour to the ground of gender or race.  To the contrary, the [complainant] has offered detailed evidence in her evidence at the hearing that the manager was abusive to all staff regardless of gender or race”.  The Equality Officer concluded that the complainant was “simply speculating that the cited grounds were the respondent’s motivation for her alleged mistreatment”.  He found that a prima facie case of discrimination had not been established and the claim failed.

Why is this case of interest?

• It is a reminder that a complainant has to do more than just attend a hearing in order to sustain a claim where the respondent does not defend it.
• Universal bad treatment is not the same as individual less favourable treatment.  Indeed it is almost a defence as it indicates that there is no less favourable treatment in comparison to other people.
• The complainant was summarily dismissed without process and this emphatically indicates the difference between the consideration of such a claim under the equality legislation and the unfair dismissals legislation.