An NHS healthcare assistant has been awarded £1,425 in compensation after an employment tribunal ruled she was subjected to harassment by a colleague who repeatedly called her 'auntie'.
Ilda Esteves, 61, informed her NHS colleague, Charles Oppong, that she found his constant use of the term offensive, a tribunal heard.
Oppong, a nurse, defended his actions by saying ‘auntie’ was a term of respect for older women in Ghanaian culture.
He also told Esteves that she would be a "good match for the older staff member".
Esteves successfully brought a claim against the NHS for harassment based on her age and sex.
Esteves began working as a healthcare assistant at the West London NHS Trust, specialising in Women’s Forensic Services, in September 2022.
She testified that Oppong, based at St Bernard's Hospital in London, had called her 'auntie' on multiple occasions, despite her requests for him to use her name.
She also highlighted two instances where he commented on her being a "good match" for an older colleague.
In a September 2023 email, Esteves formally complained about Oppong’s conduct, writing: "A staff member called me auntie multiple times despite telling him to call me by my name. He said you want to be young then!
He also commented on my lipstick and said I would be a good match for a member of staff named George."
While Oppong admitted to calling Esteves 'auntie' on one occasion, he maintained it was a term of respect in his Ghanaian culture.
But Employment Judge George Alliott found Oppong's evidence to be "poor".
He was reluctant to acknowledge that there was a George working on his ward, he claimed not to know George’s age and would not give an estimate, he did not remember how many shifts he may have worked with [Ms Esteves]... We found him evasive and vague," the judge said.
"We find that Charles Oppong probably did refer to [Ms Esteves] as auntie on a number of occasions and probably did make the comment about her being a match for an older colleague. We find that Charles Oppong, as a staff nurse responsible for leading the teams, should not have made such comments.
We find that Charles Oppong’s purpose was probably an offensive attempt at humour. We find that [Ms Esteves] did perceive it as creating an offensive environment.
"We find that the circumstances of the comments being made in the office and in the corridor and at handover were such that it had the effect of creating an offensive environment. We find that it was reasonable for the comments to have that effect.
"Consequently, [her] claim of harassment on this ground succeeds."
Judge Alliott acknowledged that "'auntie' is, in fact, a term of respect in Ghanaian culture (since the harasser had Ghanaian heritage) but, nevertheless, since it was against her wishes, it would have been offensive to her".
Esteves's other claims of harassment, discrimination, victimisation, and unlawful deduction of wages were unsuccessful.
Comments