A high-flying executive has won £420,000 after her 'stalker' boss romantically pursued her, bombarded her with messages, and treated her like a 'femme fatale' when she raised the issue. The woman, who can't be named for legal reasons, had her 'dignity violated' after her married manager's 'awkward' romantic pursuit of her and was then harassed, an employment tribunal heard.
The senior manager bombarded her with messages, sent her peach emojis - which are commonly used to refer to someone's bottom - and even proposed they moved abroad together to start a business. The 'embarrassed' newly-hired executive, who earned £55,000 a year, repeatedly rebuffed her male boss's 'overt' advances and confided in a friend, who described him as a 'stalker'.
When she raised a grievance, she was harassed by investigating bosses at the company - which operates in the transport industry - due to sexist attitudes adopted by them. Now the woman has been awarded £419,352 after successfully suing the company, which also cannot be named, for sex harassment and victimisation at the employment tribunal.
The hearing in Leeds was told that the woman, who has a law degree, started working at the firm in summer 2019 and struck up a close friendship with her boss and became second in command in his team. However, the boss - who has children with his wife - and started 'exploring a romantic possibility' between the two by sending peach emojis over text.
The boss, who is also not named in the tribunal ruling, sent her kissing emojis, unsuccessfully asked her for one-on-one dinners, drunkenly called her, and became 'jealous' of another male colleague's interaction with her. She dismissed his advances 'in good humour' at the start but then became 'troubled' by them.
In January 2020, her friend told her 'he's behaving like a stalker'. The same month, she was left 'pulling the duvet over her head' in embarrassment when she received a text from her boss which confirmed her suspicions, where he 'declared his feelings'.
Having seen her the previous evening, he texted her: "In case it’s not obvious I do really like you but I’m not the best at saying so. I’m cool if you don’t feel the same way & I wouldn’t want it to change anything, but just wanted to let you know." This was followed by a message saying 'or we could forget I sent that text and carry on as usual?????'
Later, the woman handed in her resignation following a dispute over a pay rise. She subsequently tried to withdraw the resignation, but the company refused it. In a grievance, the woman said she believed her discussed pay rise hadn't been accepted because she had rejected her bosses advances.
However, the grievance was dealt with in a 'very rare' way in which her manager's defence was accepted - something the tribunal viewed as 'seeking to defend a sexual harassment case'. The tribunal ruled that the firm had aligned itself on the side of her boss.
Employment Judge Joanna Wade said investigating bosses had 'perpetrated a stereotype' of the woman as a 'scheming femme fatale' who had only complained because she had not been given the her 'unreasonable salary demands'. Judge Wade said: "It is a very rare case where there are original allegations of harassment or discrimination, and a grievance or appeal process is also found to be discriminatory or harassing, rather than simply unreasonable or poor. "[The company's] harassment of [the woman] caused her a significant and debilitating psychiatric condition."
On the impact it has had on the woman, Judge Wade added: "The condition is anxiety disorder with depression and PTSD symptoms. The PTSD symptoms were significant and severe at the point that they were measured in November 2021. She remains unable to work and to do ordinary things; she remains unable to tell her parents or family or community what has happened; she is living a fiction that she remains working from her bedroom, when in truth she is unable to get out of bed at times."
The woman's claims against the firm - sex harassment and victimisation - succeeded. Her complaint of sex harassment against her boss failed because she raised it too late.
The judge said if the claim was raised in time then some of the conduct would have been found to have been harassment. The majority of compensation was awarded for loss of future and current earnings, as well as £24,000 for injury to feelings and £30,000 for psychiatric injury.
