The employment tribunal dismissed a discrimination claim brought by a Marks and Spencer bra fitter, concluding that the allegations were not driven by race. The decision was issued after a full hearing of the evidence presented by both parties, and the tribunal affirmed that the claim did not meet the legal threshold for racial discrimination.
Background and accusations
Elif Archbold, a Turkish national, had worked as a customer assistant in the lingerie department since 2008, giving her more than a decade of experience on the shop floor. She performed her duties alongside colleague Ms Payne, who had been employed in the same department for 16 years and was therefore one of the most senior members of the team.
The tribunal heard testimony that a “clique” existed among some staff in the area and that Payne could be “abrupt and rude” and “dismissive” toward Archbold. Witnesses described an atmosphere in which interpersonal tension often spilled over into daily interactions.
One allegation involved a heated verbal exchange when Payne lifted an unemptied bin and told Archbold, “You’ve not been doing anything.” The comment was reported as a public rebuke delivered in front of customers, which Archbold said left her feeling humiliated.
Read Also: Civil servant guilty of multiple job fraud
In a separate incident, Payne accused Archbold of “stealing” a bra-fitting appointment after Archbold fitted a customer without checking the schedule, which listed the appointment for Payne. The dispute centered on a miscommunication about the booking system and was later raised in the formal grievance.
Following these and other incidents, Archbold filed a formal complaint with management, prompting an internal investigation that examined both the alleged bullying and the procedural handling of the grievance.
Management response and tribunal focus
On a separate occasion, Adkins asked Archbold if she wanted to move to the food department as more hours were available there. Archbold felt that Adkins was trying to persuade her to leave the lingerie department. The suggestion was presented during a one-to-one meeting and was interpreted by the complainant as a subtle form of pressure.
The tribunal heard that Adkins had not conferred with HR before this conversation, even though she knew Archbold had raised concerns about bullying in the workplace, which could contravene the Equality Act 2010.
Read Also: UK recruitment slows in October
At the hearing, Employment Judge Robert Phillips considered each allegation individually. He said the issue was whether the treatment referred in the six allegations occurred because of race. He emphasized that the legal test required proof of less favourable treatment linked directly to protected characteristics.
Phillips said the panel did not rely solely on the absence of overt racial remarks, but found no evidence of racial language, stereotyping, or assumptions linked to her background. The judge observed that the evidence pointed instead to personal conflict rather than bias based on ethnicity.
The judge stated that “the evidence pointed to a dysfunctional workplace relationship characterised by interpersonal conflict, which led to mutual distrust and misunderstandings”.
Both parties were recommended to complete inclusion and diversity training, and no further action would be taken.
