London, April 8 An Indian-origin healthcare assistant employed by the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) has won a harassment claim against a nurse colleague of Ghanaian heritage for calling her "auntie".
Watford Employment Tribunal Judge George Alliott ruled that Ilda Esteves was harassed on the grounds of age and sex and ordered the West London NHS Trust to pay her a total of £1,425.15 in damages for "emotional distress".
A three-judge panel, which heard the case last year and issued detailed reasons for the judgment last month, accepted that "auntie" is a term of respect for older people in Ghanaian culture. However, staff nurse Charles Oppong was responsible for leading the teams on the ward and should not have made such comments.
"We find that Charles Oppong's intention was probably a misguided attempt at humour," the judgment states.
"We find that the claimant perceived it as creating an offensive environment. We find that the circumstances surrounding the comments being made in the office and in the corridor, and during handovers, were such that they created an offensive environment. We find that it was reasonable for these comments to have this effect. Consequently, the claimant's claim of harassment on this ground succeeds," it reads.
Esteves, a 61-year-old healthcare professional of Indian origin, gave evidence to the tribunal that Oppong used the term "auntie" on several occasions despite her asking to be referred to by her first name.
In addition, she stated that the comment about being a good match for an older colleague, whom she referred to as George, was made on two occasions.
"We have taken into account that 'Auntie' is, in fact, a term of respect in Ghanaian culture (since the harasser had Ghanaian heritage), but nevertheless, since it was against her wishes, it would have been offensive to her," the judgment concludes.
The incidents are said to have taken place over a "short period" between June and September 2023. Esteves' application for an anonymity order regarding the tribunal proceedings was denied by the tribunal on the grounds that "the public interest in the open administration of justice outweighs any of the claimant's rights".
Her other claims of harassment on the grounds of race, discrimination, victimisation, and unauthorised deduction of wages were, however, dismissed.