A married banker, who was dismissed in a relationship with a junior colleague, has sued his employer to discriminate against him, as he was more senior and male “, a tribunal heard.
An Employment Judge was told that Stanislav Stepchuk was dismissed for misconduct after a disciplinary procedure after a disciplinary procedure, telling an employment judge.
Stepchuk ended his relationship with a junior colleague – the summer of 2023 referred to as a colleague A, after knowing that his wife was pregnant, London Central Employment Tribunal heard during an initial hearing last month.
Stepchuk is now sueing its employer for direct sex and age discrimination, harassment related to sex and inappropriate dismissal.
Employment Judge Christbel McCoy wrote in his reserved judgment published on Monday, “The claimant said that the defendant was ‘stained’ by discriminating (and this) discrimination against him (and this), because he was more senior and men, he was criminals of sexual misconduct.”
Stepchuk worked at Meril Lynch, an American money management firm from March 2018, until the end of his employment in January 2024, the judge was reported.
In January 2023, Stepchuk, then a director in the firm, and the associate A began to exchange WhatsApp messages, in which Stepchuk sent an intimate picture of himself for four days to his exchange, the tribunal heard.
In those messages, the colleague revealed that she was a virgin and “lack of any sexual experience”, the judge was told.
The pair was allegedly intimateed on two occasions before Stepchuk ended their relationship.
This inspired the colleague A to respond to the Tribunal, Stepchuk, to respond to “enmity and taunts”.
He further claimed that the colleague threatened him on several occasions “suggesting that his (his employer) relationship would be a result of his wife, his pregnancy, his child and his parents continuously and his life could be in danger.”
The tribunal heard that colleague A raised a formal complaint against Stepchuk on 8 August 2023, claiming that he “had sexually harassed her and threatened her when she said she would inform HR about her concerns,” the tribunal heard.
Although Stepchuk was dismissed for misconduct, the employer did not retain the complaint of sexual harassment of the associate A, but the relationship was revealed by the Tribunal.
During the hearing on 3 June, Stepchuk asked to make public the name of his colleague, but requested to preserve his identity, told the tribunal that he “particularly got upset in inequality” that the colleague A would be given oblivion, but he and his family would not.
Although his request was rejected, Judge McCoy said about the hearing: “There is a desire to punish the colleague for his alleged behavior by ‘naming and tampering’ against the claimant.
“I consider it an important factor, unlike colleague A, the claimant has chosen to bring these proceedings.
“This is not unfair in relation to the person who initiates the proceedings, as the court proceeds accepts the general event of the public nature.”
The case is scheduled for another hearing on 16 July.
