The recent case of Dove v Brown & Newirth Ltd serves as a harsh warning to employers against allowing inappropriate nicknames to be used in the workplace.
Workplace Nicknames
Background
The Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010) protects employees against age discrimination, including harassment and victimisation relating to age. If one employee discriminates against or harasses another, the employer will be liable unless it has taken reasonable steps to prevent such conduct from occurring.
Facts of the case
Mr Dove was employed as a salesperson for 25 years by a jewellery manufacturer until his dismissal at the age of 60. During his employment, Mr Dove was required to report to a head of sales who was considerably younger than him. The head of sales branded Mr Dove “Gramps” and referred to him by this nickname in emails and verbally in front of other colleagues. Mr Dove found this nickname disrespectful, but did not raise a grievance in respect of it.
He was later dismissed following the transfer of some of his key clients to the younger head of sales. His dismissal also followed feedback from customers that he was ‘old fashioned’ and ‘long in the tooth’ and the business said that his traditional approach was out of touch with its needs.
Mr Dove brought a claim in the employment tribunal arguing that he had been discriminated against on the grounds of his age.
Decision
Despite the company arguing that the use of the nickname was not intended to be offensive, the employment tribunal in the case held that Mr Dove had been less favourably treated during his employment because of his age and that his dismissal was unfair. The tribunal awarded him £63,391.
The tribunal said that a younger salesperson would not have been dismissed, noting that Mr Dove’s dismissal was influenced by customers’ stereotypical views on age and that it was clear that these references related to his age. The tribunal ruled that the company had accepted and adopted the customers’ discriminatory attitudes without questioning these.
Further, the tribunal held that in allowing colleagues to call Mr Dove “Gramps”, the employer had implied that ageist attitudes were tolerated in the workplace. It was irrelevant that the age-specific nickname was ‘banter’; it was still discriminatory and when used continuously for a long period of time could have a hurtful and detrimental effect on the employee in question.
Comment
This decision demonstrates that the use of nicknames in the workplace is capable of constituting harassment for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. Employers must be alive to the risk of discrimination relating to nicknames and all employment law policies, procedures and documentation must be checked to ensure that these are not discriminatory.
For more employment law advice or to comment on this article, contact us to speak to a member of our employment law team.