In Mr M Jones v Tango Networks UK Ltd Mark Jones, 61, was told by boss Philip Hesketh that he wanted a change of ‘dynamics’. He claimed that Philip Hesketh had complained about a lack of workplace diversity before his employer, Tango Networks, moved to dismiss.
Mr Hesketh, who is bald, had previously voiced disappointment that candidates for a recent job at the mobile phone firm where they worked had been ‘mirror images’ of himself.
The company then ‘chipped away’ at ‘undynamic’ Mr Jones, who has a full head of hair, as part of a ‘firm plan’ to remove him from his £60,000 a year job before he acquired employment rights for working there two years, the hearing was told.
When Mr Jones was put on a ‘sham’ performance improvement plan (PIP), he raised a grievance which was rejected, in what the tribunal called a ‘rubber stamping exercise’ to ‘cover Mr Hesketh’s back’.
After resigning, he took Tango Networks Ltd to court and was awarded £71,441 after the tribunal ruled the firm had discriminated against him.
The panel concluded: ‘In our view, the evidence about this is enough to reverse the burden of proof. We could conclude that, whether consciously or unconsciously, Mr Hesketh perceived Mr Jones as un-dynamic, and he associated more dynamic people with the characteristics of younger people.’
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.
