A woman who wasn't invited on a staff night out was given nearly £75,000 following a tribunal hearing over the matter.
Rita Leher said she was "shunned" by her colleagues from one of Britain's biggest casinos when she was the only person who was excluded from an evening gathering to Las Iguanas. The hearing was told that other staff members even "insensitively" organised the event in front of her.
Following the hearing, the 51-year-old has been awarded £74,113. The tribunal judge ruled that Ms Leher's colleagues' actions to deliberately not inviting her out amounted to victimisation, HullLive reports.
Read more: Queen grants Wrexham and Douglas city status along with six other towns
Judge Sara Moor said that the exclusion of Ms Leher was a "detriment at work" because she lost the chance to "bond with colleagues". Alongside her victimisation claim, Ms Leher, who is of mixed-black African heritage, also won in cases of unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination.
The tribunal heard how Ms Leher has started working at Aspers 'super casino' - which is the second biggest in Britain, employs 560 staff and is open 24 hours day for 364 days a year - in the Westfield Centre in Stratford, East London, in November 2011. She worked on the casino's cash desk and had 22 years experience within the gaming industry having worked at other high-end establishments.
Because of her experience, which included running a betting shop at one point, Ms Leher was paid £23,500-a-year, more than any other cashier at the casino. When she resigned from her post, she was the longest-serving cashier there and had received many accolades for her work, even working on a "VIP cruise" due to her good rapport with punters.
However, Ms Leher saw many other cashiers - all of them younger - promoted above her over the years, none of whom were black or mixed heritage. Despite her experience and position, her applications for higher roles were rejected or ignored within the company.
The hearing in London was also told that Ms Leher had issues when it came to getting training, with a request she made to bosses being ignored. Meanwhile, the same request from a white co-worker was granted.
She raised a grievance concerning a breach of equality and diversity policy a year later, but this was dismissed. This led to her being signed off for stress in August 2018.
During her time off sick, Ms Leher raised another grievance alleging she had been victimised, harassed and bullied since the previous issue she raised. She soon started a phased return to work, but said she was "shunned" and "ignored" by colleagues, with the atmosphere described as "uncomfortable".
In December, she overheard colleagues planning the trip to Las Iguanas for drinks, but Ms Leher was not invited. A report to the tribunal said: "She was the only one in the room not included.
"This was not a formally organised works drink, but we [the panel] all consider it was a drink among work colleagues to which Ms Leher would normally have been invited. We all agree it was at the very least insensitive to discuss the arrangements in front of her when she was not invited.
"We all conclude that this exclusion was because she had complained of discrimination. While working relationships were relatively amicable, the team did not wish to socialise with someone who had complained of discrimination. This was a way to make their displeasure over the complaint felt."
She went back off work with stress shortly afterwards and launched her tribunal claims a few months later. When Ms Leher's return to work was discussed, it was mentioned that she could work on an alternative area of the casino and do six weeks' training for it.
Ms Leher considered the offer an "insult" due to someone with her experience. This led to her resignation, saying she felt "belittled".
Judge Moor says the exclusion from work drinks puts co-workers at a "disadvantage". She said: "We unanimously agree that being excluded from discussions at work about a social occasion amongst colleagues when one would normally be included would subject an employee to a detriment at work.
"A reasonable employee would consider that such exclusion was to their disadvantage because they had lost the opportunity to bond with colleagues on that social occasion. The occasion was sufficiently linked to work by the fact that it was amongst work colleagues and was discussed about at work and would provide the opportunity for team bonding. We unanimously agree that this was because Ms Leher had complained about victimisation."
For her successful claims for unlawful victimisation, unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination, Ms Leher was given £74,113.65 compensation for injury to feelings and loss of overtime. Other claims for victimisation, harassment and race and age discrimination failed.
