One Easyjet Cabin manager who received a sleeve Complaints The alleged inappropriate and incorrect comments were not dismissed incorrectly, A employment tribunal Has ruled.
Ross Barr, a manager in Edinburgh, was dismissed by the airline after a disciplinary Hearing In September last year, but claimed that he was incorrectly rejected, that the company failed to provide a written reason for firing and that he was less favorable due to his sexual orientation.
The allegations against him were involved in a flight to a crew member that he was “staring at your donkey”, called a woman. Air hostess According to the tribunal’s decision, the Tanoy referred to “Lovely Ladies” and their “more attractive colleagues”.
In August 2022, a complaint was complained about Mr. Barr’s behavior towards women colleagues on a flight, resulting in a disciplinary hearing in a final written warning.
At the end of 2023, an anonymous complaint was alleged by a crew member that Mr. Barr repeatedly made inappropriate comments, which gave him uncomfortable and “sexually or derogatory comments for passengers” including “including homophobic and transfobic comments” in his presence “including” sexual or derogatory comments for “for” for “for homophobic and transfobic comments”, after which he should receive consultation and advice.
A customer complained about Mr. Barr’s conduct during a flight in July last year, alleging that he told a female member of the cabin crew: “I am not doing anything, I am just staring at your ass” when the corridors follow him.
During a meeting with Edinburgh Base Manager, Mr. Barr said that he cannot remember the incident, saying: “Without knowing who it was, I don’t know what it would be reference.
“You get better with some crew and do a banquet together … the only thing that I could think of was from another flight, this (female crew member) who was in front. I went to get something from the trolley and I passed her breast and I went very close and said that I had touched my boobs.
“I am killing my mind and cannot think anything. I remember someone was bent and I said ‘Oh I am not looking at your butts’ but cannot remember when it was.”
The crew member confirmed in the interview that Mr. Barr had commented, but said it did not annoy him by calling him “banquet” and a “cuff comment”, which he did not think he did not think was directed.
The same passenger also alleged that Mr. Barr was “consistently and improperly treated”, as he rode on the aircraft, which included calling a female flight attendant “cute women” on Tanoy and referring to his “more attractive colleagues”.
Mr. Bair called the members of the women’s crew “cute women”, but said that he also called the male crew “cute gentlemen”, and explained that his “more attractive colleagues” had a reference to self-develop.
In August last year, another complaint was made about a crew member about Mr. Barr, who was after the first innings of working with her, alleging: “The whole innings was very much talking about sex or making jokes about it.
“He explained that he was suspended before speaking (complaint) that a person had first placed against him because” everyone said that his breasts would grow up when he became pregnant, and guess what he did. “
She also complained that when she was putting back in the bag when she was putting back in the bag, which had very few space for it, Mr. Barr said to her: “Is trying to have a problem in it?
In an interview about these allegations, Mr. Barr did not accept that his comments were sexual in nature and, about the seatbelt comment, said: “I can hear me saying that ‘just stuff in it’, I don’t know … I don’t really remember.”
Another crew member in the flight said that she could not remember anyone from making sexual comments.
In a disciplinary meeting it was decided that Mr. Barr’s behavior was a risk for business and gross misconduct, and that their employment would be abolished.
His appeal against dismissal failed.
Employment Judge Muril Robisson found that “no substance” about Mr. Barr’s concerns was about the rationality of investigation in his conduct and the decision to dismiss him was based on a “real belief”, which he had allegedly misconduct.
“In relation to the claim that he was less favorable due to his sexual orientation, it is understood that the claimant trusted a former colleague whom he described as a comparative as his guru,” the judge continued.
“He claimed that he reiterated his style of public announcements, but that his compulsion was not reprimanded. However, it completely remembers this point.
“The claimant did not provide any evidence, suggesting that it was a comprehensive harassment, or in fact a fictional comparative, the same or equal conditions, who was accused of sexual harassment after complaints from the customer and/or colleague.”
The judge found that Mr. Barr had not established less favorable treatment due to his sexual orientation and also dismissed the claim that the Easyzet failed to supply written reasons for firing.