A UK court has ruled that calling a man “bald” can be considered sexual harassment. The ruling stems from a case involving Tony Finn, a former employee of the British Bung Company, who sued the West Yorkshire-based firm for sexual harassment after an offensive remark was made by a supervisor.
Tony Finn, an electrician, had worked at the British Bung Company for nearly 24 years before being dismissed in May 2021. Following his dismissal, Finn took legal action against the company, alleging unfair dismissal and sexual harassment, with one of his key complaints being the derogatory comments made about his baldness.
The harassment incident occurred during a heated argument on the shop floor, where Jamie King, a factory supervisor, called Mr. Finn a “bald c***”. Offended by the personal nature of the remark, Mr. Finn pursued legal action, claiming the comment was not just an insult, but sexual harassment.
In February 2022, an Employment Tribunal ruled in favor of Mr. Finn, agreeing that the baldness-related comment constituted sexual harassment. Mr. Finn also won claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful termination.
However, the British Bung Company challenged the decision, appealing the tribunal’s ruling. The company argued that since baldness can affect both men and women, the insult could not be considered sexual harassment based on gender discrimination. They further argued that referencing baldness could not be inherently tied to someone’s sex.
High Court Upholds The Decision
In November 2023, the Employment Appeals Tribunal, overseen by Mrs. Justice Naomi Ellenbogen DBE, dismissed the company’s appeal. Justice Ellenbogen concluded that the comment was “inherently related to sex” and that baldness, particularly in men, is often used as a point of ridicule linked to masculinity.
“The remarks about Mr. Finn’s baldness were directed specifically at his appearance and masculinity, making the comment inherently related to his sex,” said Justice Ellenbogen in the court’s ruling.
This decision sets a legal precedent, indicating that insults targeting physical traits traditionally associated with one gender, such as baldness in men, can be classified as sexual harassment.
Implications Of The Ruling
The ruling has gained attention as it broadens the interpretation of sexual harassment in the workplace. It demonstrates that comments targeting physical appearance, even those not exclusively related to one gender, can still be classified as harassment if they carry gendered connotations.
Following this decision, Mr. Finn is now eligible for compensation for both the harassment and wrongful dismissal. The case underscores the importance of respectful conduct in the workplace and sends a message to employers and employees alike that derogatory comments based on physical appearance will not be tolerated.
MUST READ: Six Injured In Hadera Terror Stabbing; Police Neutralize Attacker
