The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that comments about an employee’s accent can be considered racial harassment under the Equality Act 2010, even if they weren’t made with racist intentions.
The decision reminds us that if conduct towards someone with a protected characterstic has the effect of violating a person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliaring or offensive environment for them, the intent of the harasser is irrelevant.
Here’s what you need to know about the case, why it matters, and what steps you can take to create a more inclusive workplace.
The Case
Ms. Carozzi, a Brazilian national of Jewish ethnic origin, worked at the University of Hertfordshire but left the job before completing her probation period. She claimed she faced race-related harassment due to comments about her accent. She also brought a claim for victimisation, alleging that the University’s HR representative, Ms. Withers, refused to provide meeting notes to prevent her from using them in a potential discrimination case.
The employment tribunal dismissed her claims, deciding that the comments were about her “intelligibility” and not motivated by race. They also ruled that Ms. Withers’ decision was not victimisation because she would have acted similarly with any employee planning legal action.
However, Ms. Carozzi wasn’t satisfied with this outcome and took her case to the Employment Appeal Tribunal—and she won.
Why Accent-Based Comments Can Be Racial Harassment
Under the Equality Act 2010, harassment occurs when someone engages in unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic (such as race) that violates a person’s dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment. Importantly, the conduct only needs to be “related to” a protected characteristic—not necessarily motivated by it.
In this case, the EAT explained that:
- Comments about someone’s accent could be linked to their national or ethnic identity, which means they can be race-related.
- The law doesn’t require proof of intent or malice. What matters is the effect on the person experiencing the comments.
- Harassment claims are broader than direct discrimination claims, which require intent. Even unintentional remarks can be considered harassment if they create an offensive environment.
The EAT found that the original tribunal had focused too much on the intent behind the comments rather than their impact on Ms. Carozzi. The ruling emphasised that even if the comments were about her “intelligibility,” they were still related to her ethnic identity and could have made her feel degraded or humiliated.
What About the Victimisation Claim?
The EAT also tackled the issue of victimisation, which happens when someone is treated unfairly for making a discrimination complaint or doing something related to the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal had dismissed Ms. Carozzi’s claim, reasoning that Ms. Withers would have withheld the meeting notes from anyone planning legal action, regardless of the type of claim.
But the EAT disagreed, explaining that:
- The real question was whether the decision was influenced by the fact that Ms. Carozzi might make a race discrimination claim, which is a protected act under the Equality Act.
- Comparing her situation to others making different types of legal claims (e.g., constructive dismissal) was irrelevant because victimisation claims don’t require a comparison.
- The tribunal failed to consider whether withholding the notes put Ms. Carozzi at a disadvantage, especially since she was trying to resolve her grievance internally before escalating to a tribunal case.
The EAT allowed the appeal, sending both the harassment and victimisation claims back to a new tribunal for reconsideration.
What This Means for Employers
This ruling serves as a critical reminder for employers to:
- Recognise that comments about accents can be race-related, even if they seem harmless or are not intended to be discriminatory.
- Focus on the effect of the comments on the individual, rather than the intent behind them.
- Handle discrimination complaints carefully, ensuring that actions such as withholding information don’t appear retaliatory.
- Provide training on diversity and inclusion, especially about cultural sensitivities and unconscious bias.
Practical Steps for a More Inclusive Workplace
- Review Your Policies: Ensure that anti-harassment and discrimination policies explicitly cover language and accent-based remarks.
- Train Your Teams: Offer regular training on cultural awareness, unconscious bias, and how to communicate respectfully.
- Create Safe Reporting Channels: Make it easy and safe for employees to report concerns without fear of retaliation.
- Handle Complaints Sensitively: Investigate all complaints thoroughly and impartially, considering the effect on the complainant.
- Promote a Culture of Respect: Foster an inclusive environment where diversity is celebrated, and all employees feel valued.
For assistance, please contact [email protected]
