Calling a man ‘bald’ is sexual harassment, employment tribunal rules
Tony Finn, who worked at West Yorkshire manufacturing firm for 24 years, is in line for compensation
Calling a man “bald” is sexual harassment, an employment tribunal has ruled.
Hair loss is much more prevalent among men than women so using it to describe someone is a form of discrimination, a judge has concluded. Commenting on a man’s baldness in the workplace is equivalent to remarking on the size of a woman’s breasts, the finding suggests.
The ruling – made by a panel of three men who in making their judgment bemoaned their own lack of hair – comes in a case between a veteran electrician and the manufacturing firm where he was employed.
Tony Finn – who is in line for compensation – had worked for the West Yorkshire-based British Bung Company for almost 24 years when he was fired in May last year. He took the company to the tribunal claiming, among other things, he had been the victim of sexual harassment after an incident with the factory supervisor, Jamie King.
Finn alleged that during a shopfloor row in July 2019, King had referred to him as a “bald cunt”. The tribunal heard Finn was less upset by the “Anglo-Saxon” language than the comment on his appearance.
The allegation resulted in the panel – led by Judge Jonathan Brain – deliberating on whether remarking on his baldness was simply insulting or actually harassment.
“We have little doubt that being referred to in this pejorative manner was unwanted conduct as far as [Finn] was concerned,” the tribunal found. “This is strong language. Although, as we find, industrial language was commonplace on this West Yorkshire factory floor, in our judgment Mr King crossed the line by making remarks personal to the claimant about his appearance.”
Finn had not complained about the use of “industrial language” but was particularly affronted at being called bald, the panel said.
“It is difficult to conclude other than that Mr King uttered those words with the purpose of violating [Finn’s] dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for him,” the judgment found. “Of his own admission, Mr King’s intention was to threaten [Finn] and to insult him. In our judgment, there is a connection between the word ‘bald’ on the one hand and the protected characteristic of sex on the other.
“[The company’s lawyer] was right to submit that women as well as men may be bald. However, as all three members of the tribunal will vouchsafe, baldness is much more prevalent in men than women.
“We find it to be inherently related to sex.”
As part of its ruling, the panel raised a previous tribunal case where a man was found to have sexually harassed a woman by remarking on the size of her breasts to rebut the firm’s point. “It is much more likely that a person on the receiving end of a comment such as that which was made in [that] case would be female,” the tribunal said.
“So too, it is much more likely that a person on the receiving end of a remark such as that made by Mr King would be male. Mr King made the remark with a view to hurting the claimant by commenting on his appearance which is often found amongst men.
“The tribunal therefore determines that by referring to the claimant as a ‘bald cunt’ … Mr King’s conduct was unwanted, it was a violation of the claimant’s dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant’s sex.”
Finn’s compensation will be determined at a later date.
Pay particular attention to the sounds highlighted in pink. Go to Word Reference to listen to the words (there are a range of accents). Use a 50 or 70% playback rate so that you can hear all the sounds clearly.
The stressed syllable is preceded by '
Listen to the sounds of vowels and consonants in this English File Pronunciation Chart.
Pronunciation:
bald /bɔːld/
harrassment /həˈræs.mənt/
manufacturing /mæn.jəˈfæk.tʃə.rɪŋ/
firm /fɜːm/
among /əˈmʌŋ/
judge /dʒʌdʒ/
suggest /səˈdʒest/
electrician /ɪl.ekˈtrɪʃ.ən/
employed /ɪmˈplɔɪd/
fired /faɪərd/
alleged /əˈledʒd/
row /raʊ/
upset /ʌpˈsɛt/
concerned /kənˈsɜːnd/
purpose /ˈpɜː.pəs/
humiliating /hjuːˈmɪl.i.eɪ.tɪŋ/
environment /ɪnˈvaɪ.rən.mənt/
raised /reɪzd/
hurting /hɜːtɪŋ/
determined /dɪˈtɜː.mɪnd/
Comments
Hi Graham,
Oh my God! I can´t understand it. I have read several times this article and I don´t know what an affront like this has to do with sexual harassment. In my opinion, an affront will always be an affront and it can´t have sex. Harassing is to bother, chase or go against anyone, that is, it must be an action from one person against other person. It´s necessary to repeat this behaviour during several months, not only one time, as the Spanish Low. Mr King only insult on one occasion and this event could be a carelessness. The company or its boss must have clear intention of humiliate employee and so on. The own Tribunal said that it was a strong language. Therefore, I don´t see that it was harassment.
Although, the panel said that this affront is inherently to sex, I can´t understand it neither. Mr King called bald cunt Mr. Finn, but he didn´t speak about sex. He neither called woman, nor speak about sex of man or woman. The Tribunal said that there is a connection between the word bald and the protected characteristic of sex. I can´t see it. Almost every insult is obscene and indecent, then you can´t say that it is sexual harassment, even, a lot of time you can insult without thinking what it means. What is more, some people want to stand out qualities of whichever when they insult.
This ruling is completely appealing and I hope that Mr. King takes this case to the Court of Appeal. Has this ruling been done by the panel of three judges who could bemoan of their own lack of hair?
See you.
I don't know why some men are so touchy about their baldness. They should look on the bright side - baldies are far more attractive.👨🦲😀
Oh my God! I can´t understand it. /I don't get it. I have read this article several times and I don´t know what an affront like this has to do with sexual harassment. In my opinion, an affront will always be an affront and it has nothing to do with someone's sex. Harassing is to bother, chase or go against someone, that is, it must be an action from one person against another. It's necessary to repeat this behaviour for several months, not only once, as with Spanish law. Mr. King only insulted Mr. Finn on one occasion and this event could simply be carelessness. The company or its boss must have clear intention of humiliating the employee and so on. The very same tribunal said that it was strong language. Therefore, I don´t see how it was harassment.
Although, the panel said that this affront is inherent to sex, I still don't understand why. Mr King called Mr. Finn a bald cunt, but he didn´t refer to his sex. Neither did he call him a woman, nor speak about anything related to the sex of a man or woman. The Tribunal said that there is a connection between the word bald and the protected characteristic of sex. I can´t see it. Almost every insult is obscene and indecent, then you can't say that it is sexual harassment, even, a lot of the time you can insult without thinking what it means. What is more, some people want to point out characteristics of whoever they are insulting.
This ruling is *appalling and I hope that Mr. King takes this case to the Court of Appeal. Has this ruling been made by the panel of three judges just because of their own lack of hair?
*appalling = pésimo , appealing = de especial interés, atractivo (idea)