The recent Employment Tribunal case Otomewo v The Carphone Warehouse Ltd provides a useful reminder to employers of the dangers of "office banter" involving social media. Mr Otomewo was the manager
The recent Employment Tribunal case Otomewo v The Carphone Warehouse Ltd provides a useful reminder to employers of the dangers of "office banter" involving social media.
Mr Otomewo was the manager of a Carphone Warehouse store. Whilst at work two members of Mr Otomewo's team used his iPhone without his permission and updated his status - "Finally came out of the closet. I am gay and proud". Mr Otomewo is not gay, he did not believe that his colleagues thought he was gay and there was no background of any previous office banter in this regard. Mr Otomewo raised a complaint about the incident, but later withdrew the complaint. Mr Otomewo was subsequently dismissed by The Carphone Warehouse for an unrelated matter.
Mr Otomewo brought claims against The Carphone Warehouse alleging unfair dismissal, direct sex discrimination, direct sexual orientation discrimination and sexual orientation harassment. Mr Otomewo lost his claims for direct sex and sexual orientation discrimination and was successful in his claim for unfair dismissal, but was not awarded any compensation because he was found to have contributed 100% to his dismissal. However, Mr Otomewo was successful in his claim for sexual orientation harassment.
The Employment Tribunal found that it was reasonable for Mr Otomewo to be embarrassed and distressed by the status update on his Facebook page which was unwanted and an unnecessary and unwarranted intrusion into his private life on a public space amounting to sexual orientation harassment. The Employment Tribunal found that the comments were made in the course of employment and that The Carphone Warehouse, as the employer, was liable for such actions.
Employers should review both their equal opportunities and their social media policies to ensure that it is clear that employees can suffer sexual orientation discrimination where they do not have the particular characteristic to which the discrimination relates and that their social media policy includes postings on any social media not just the employee's or employer's social media.