In Mrs J Bradbury v Sky In-Home Service Ltd Jane Bradbury identifies her race as Latino, although she was adopted and is not aware of the race of her parents She was brought up as someone who was white British by her white British adoptive parents. Her skin colour is consistent with someone of Latino ethnic origin. Sky In-Home provides services for the installation and maintenance of equipment in customers’ properties. It has about 3,000 employees. It shares services with other members of the Sky group of companies, including for HR.
Mrs Bradbury was employed as a customer advisor. She was left ‘distressed’ after Rosemary Cook – a colleague at Sky – insisted she must have experienced prejudice due to her Latino heritage. Ms Cook made the remark during a conversation about a presentation she was due to give about racism following the murder of George Floyd and the emergence of the Black Lives Matter, an employment tribunal heard.
Mrs Bradbury ‘forcibly’ rejected the assumption that was made from her colleague.
‘I have never felt oppressed in my life, and I think it is wrong for this person to assume because of the colour of my skin I have without even knowing anything of my background ethnicity or upbringing,’ she said.
The 50-year-old proceeded to take several days off work after she became self-conscious about her skin colour and had concerns over whether she was being treated differently because of her race.
The tribunal ruled that though Ms Cook had not meant to cause offence, the remark was ‘blunt’ and an assumption which amounted to stereotyping.
The panel ruled: ‘The remark was one particularly concerning the colour of Mrs Bradbury’s skin, which is not white. It was clear to the Tribunal that the remark was made because of that colour, such that it was a kind of discrimination. In short, the remark equated the colour of Mrs Bradbury’s skin with her having been oppressed and that she would have felt that oppression, which had not been her view or experience. We should make it clear that we did not consider that Ms Cook deliberately used offensive language, nor did she deliberately seek to cause harm’.
Mrs Bradbury was awarded £14,000 in damages.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
