Irish accent mocking worker was unfairly sacked, tribunal finds

An engineering storeman sacked after saying to a colleague “top the morning to ya” in a mock Irish accent has won more than £16,000 for unfair dismissal.

Karl Davies, then 57, was working at Wrexham’s Oscar Mayer ready meal manufacturing site when he greeted a manager in the accent while listening to Irish music, an employment tribunal heard.

The manager, Scott Millward, had been escorting a “red-headed” external auditor when the remark was made on 13 August 2024.

He reported his colleague to the employer, who launched a probe into whether the comments amounted to racial harassment, with his dismissal following, the tribunal in Mold, Flintshire was told.

The claimant repeated the phrase multiple times, with tribunal Judge Vincent Ryan accepting that he was “effectively channelling the musical vibe”.

The judge said that Mr Davies adopted an accent in a “reprehensible” and “mocking” way and goaded Mr Millward by repeating the phrase “in a manner that Mr Millward was bound to find irritating and embarrassing”.

He said that the claimant was trying to get on Mr Millward’s nerves to get a reaction from him and to cause him embarrassment.

However, he added: “I find that the purpose was not to racially harass Mr Millward, and there is no evidence before me that it had the effect, either, on anyone.

“It was nevertheless blameworthy as (Mr Davies) was subordinate to Mr Millward.

“It gave rise to the disciplinary proceedings and therefore contributed to the eventual sanction.”

The claimant did not know and had not seen the auditor, who is not known or believed to be Irish, the tribunal heard.

A manager, against whom Mr Davies had an unresolved grievance, conducted the investigation into Mr Davies’ comments, the tribunal was told.

The judge wrote that Oscar Mayer’s disciplinary case was based on its perception that Mr Davies may have perceived that the auditor looked “typically Irish”.

Mr Davies’ phrase was found by his employer to amount to harassment, but neither his clean disciplinary record or 27 years of employment for the firm were taken into account, the judge found.

The tribunal ruled that the chosen investigator was not “appropriate”, witness statements were inconsistent and the probe was “largely based on assumptions”.

The judge said: “The claimant was accused of using an employment-ending, reputation damaging, loss-inducing, racially motivated slur, a slur which could have created an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive working environment. These are serious matters,” he said.

“On the facts peculiar to this case, I found that the dismissal was unfair, which does not mean that I approve the use of the greeting in question or the use of mock accents.”