Director who was going to be sacked wins age discrimination payout

Sales director, 61, who was going to be sacked after his boss told him he didn’t want to hire ‘bald-headed 50-year-old men’ wins £71,000 payout for age discrimination

• Sales director’s boss said he didn’t want ‘team of bald-headed 50-year-old men’
• Mark Jones, 61, was told by boss Philip Hesketh he wanted change of ‘dynamics’
• The firm planned to remove ‘undynamic’ Mr Jones, who has a full head of hair
• Mr Jones won a £71k payout for age discrimination after an employment tribunal 

A company sales director whose middle-aged boss told him he did not want to hire a ‘team of bald-headed 50-year-old men’ has won more than £70,000 in an age discrimination case. 

Mark Jones, 61, claimed that Philip Hesketh had complained about a lack of workplace diversity before his employer Tangos Network moved to dismiss, a tribunal heard..

Mr Hesketh, who is bald, had previously voiced disappointment that candidates for a recent job at the mobile phone firm where they worked had been ‘mirror images’ of himself.

The company then ‘chipped away’ at ‘undynamic’ Mr Jones, who has a full head of hair, as part of a ‘firm plan’ to remove him from his £60,000 a year job before he acquired employment rights for working there two years, the hearing was told.

When Mr Jones was put on a ‘sham’ performance improvement plan (PIP), he raised a grievance which was rejected, in what the tribunal called a ‘rubber stamping exercise’ to ‘cover Mr Hesketh’s back’.

Mark Jones, 61, (pictured) was told by boss Philip Hesketh he wanted change of ‘dynamics’

After resigning, he took Tango Networks Ltd to court and was awarded £71,441 after the tribunal ruled the firm had discriminated against him.

The panel concluded: ‘Mr Hesketh perceived Mr Jones as un-dynamic and he associated more dynamic people with the characteristics of younger people.

The tribunal, held in Leeds, heard Mr Jones was 59 when he started working as a channel account director at the company – which sells licences for mobile phone SIM cards for businesses – in January 2019.

In addition to his salary he was also eligible for up to £40,000 a year in commission payments.

When a vacancy opened up late in 2020, Mr Jones recommended a candidate called Murray Grimes, who was invited to apply for the role by Mr Hesketh.

At the tribunal, Mr Hesketh admitted to having a conversation about 57-year-old Mr Grimes with Mr Jones, after the interview, where he said it was ‘a shame’ there hadn’t been more diversity in the interviewees, who were a ‘mirror image’ of himself – middle aged white men.

Mr Jones told the tribunal this had been ‘part of the conversation’, but remembered Mr Hesketh, saying: ‘I don’t want a team of bald-headed 50 year old men – I want to change the dynamics.’

The panel heard that Mr Grimes was one of the final three candidates, but only the other two – both in their 40s – were invited to a further interview before both being offered the job.

It was heard Mr Hesketh had described desirable colleagues or candidates as ‘high energy’, ‘energetic’ and ‘youthful’.

Philip Hesketh (pictured), who is bald, voiced disappointment that candidates for a recent job at the mobile phone firm where they worked had been ‘mirror images’ of himself

On 18 December 2020, a meeting invitation from Mr Hesketh to the company’s CEO said he wanted to offer the two candidates the job, on the ‘provision’ they ‘move Mark on very early in Jan 2021’.

The tribunal rejected Tango’s reasoning that ‘move him on’ had meant ‘move his performance on’ and concluded there had been a ‘firm plan to dismiss Mr Jones and replace him with another candidate’ before he had two years’ service so they could do it ‘quickly’.

Mr Jones had a panic attack during a week off in late December and subsequently went off work with stress for a week until early January 2021.

Upon his return, having reached two years service, Mr Jones was invited to a ‘return to work’ meeting where Mr Hesketh raised an ‘issue’ about him not negotiating a deal with a client.

Mr Jones became ‘suspicious’ this was part of a plan to remove him and the tribunal ruled this was the ‘start of the process to remove Mr Jones from the organisation’.

‘Without any prior warning’ Mr Jones was put on a performance plan in February 2021, and as a result he raised a grievance and submitted a subject access request for ‘all notes’ between his bosses ‘in relation to my planned termination’, the tribunal heard.

On 8 February Mr Jones went off sick but asked the grievance continue in his absence, after his doctor advised him to ‘remove himself from all aspects of work’.

On 26 February, a grievance outcome letter rejected all his complaints – that there had been no ‘genuine reason’ for a performance plan, the ‘real reason’ for his attempted removal was his age and that he had been ‘set up’ to be sacked.

The tribunal ruled the grievance had not been dealt with ‘impartially’ and there had not been ‘any kind of adequate investigation’ in an outcome designed to ‘cover Mr Hesketh’s back’ in a ‘rubber stamping exercise’.

In March 2021, Mr Jones resigned and submitted a grievance appeal, which was rejected.

In his resignation letter a ‘shocked and appalled’ Mr Jones said: ‘I am saddened at the blatant manipulation and lies set out in the grievance report and believe this is only designed as a tick box exercise to make me look bad and to further a performance management process which should never have been carried out in the first place.’

He said the grievance findings were a ‘fundamental breach of trust and confidence’, calling the performance improvement plan process a ‘sham’.

Employment Judge Ian Miller, said: ‘We have found that the respondent did seek to dismiss Mr Jones at the meeting on 18 December and thereafter subjected him to a PIP process with the intention of dismissing him.

‘We have found that Tango has demonstrated no basis for deciding to dismiss Mr Jones and then subsequently implementing the capability process. 

‘In our view, Tango was caught off guard by Mr Jones being off sick and did not have time to dismiss him before he accrued 2 years service.’

Regarding Mr Hesketh’s high energy, energetic, youthful comments, Judge Miller said: ‘They chipped away at the relationship from Mr Jones’ perspective and in the entirety of the circumstances it was reasonable for him to feel [that they seriously damaged the relationship of trust].’

The panel ruled Tango had breached their contract and Mr Jones was unfairly dismissed.

Regarding the age discrimination claim, Judge Miller said: ‘Mr Jones was replaced, initially, by at least one younger person doing the same job.

‘Mr Hesketh referred to wanting to change the dynamics of the team, and he wanted a more diverse workforce. 

‘In our view, the evidence about this is enough to reverse the burden of proof. We could conclude that, whether consciously or unconsciously, Mr Hesketh perceived Mr Jones as un-dynamic and he associated more dynamic people with the characteristics of younger people.’

His age discrimination and some harassment claims were also successful, for which he was awarded £20,000 injury to feelings, alongside an unfair dismissal sum of £28,807.

The total payment received, including payable tax and interest was £71,441.

Source: Read Full Article