Dismissed after 10 days via WhatsApp: race discrimination claim fails but wages claim succeeds
A beauty consultant who was dismissed by WhatsApp after just 10 days lost her race discrimination claim but won £382 for unpaid training days and underpayment.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #short-service
- #brown-sugar
- #hypothetical-comparator
- #training-days
- #beauty-therapist-rate
Key facts
- Claimant worked as Beauty Consultant from 5 April 2022 to 15 April 2022.
- Claimant was dismissed by Gabriele via WhatsApp on 15 April 2022 for lack of initiative.
- Claimant was called 'brown sugar' by manager Paulina on two occasions.
- Claimant overheard colleagues discussing black clients as difficult on 8 April 2022.
- Claimant was not paid for three training days and was paid at lower rate for therapy work.
- Respondent conceded claimant was due payment for training days.
Timeline
-
Job application
Claimant successfully applied for Beauty Consultant position.
-
Employment started
Claimant began work as Beauty Consultant. First three days were training.
-
Alleged overheard racist comment
Claimant alleges she heard colleagues discussing black clients as difficult.
-
First 'brown sugar' comment
Paulina called claimant 'brown sugar' for the first time.
-
Second 'brown sugar' comment and meeting
Paulina called claimant 'brown sugar' again. At a morning meeting, Paulina said religion should not be discussed but race could be mentioned in context of skin.
-
Dismissal
Gabriele sent WhatsApp message dismissing claimant for lack of initiative.
-
Case management hearing
Preliminary hearing where issues were agreed.
-
Substantive hearing day 1
First day of the final hearing via CVP.
-
Judgment given
Oral judgment dismissing race discrimination claim but allowing unlawful deductions claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was directly discriminated against because of her race when she was dismissed and not allowed to do consultation work, and whether she was unlawfully underpaid.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the race discrimination claim, finding that the alleged incidents (being called 'brown sugar', overhearing racist comments, and a manager's comments about discussing race) did not prove that her dismissal or work allocation was because of her race. The respondent's explanation that she lacked initiative was accepted as genuine.
The tribunal upheld the unlawful deductions claim. The respondent conceded that the claimant was owed payment for three training days and for being paid at a lower rate for therapy work.
Compensation:
- Unpaid training days and underpayment: £382
Lessons & takeaways
- Short-service employees have limited protection: with only 10 days' service, the claimant could not bring an unfair dismissal claim, only discrimination or unlawful deductions claims.
- To win a race discrimination claim, you need evidence that the treatment was because of your race, not just that offensive comments were made.
- Keep records of hours worked and pay received: the claimant succeeded on her wages claim because she could show she was underpaid.
- If you are dismissed quickly, ask for a written reason: the employer's explanation (lack of initiative) was accepted because the claimant could not prove it was a pretext for discrimination.
A very short employment and a very quick dismissal
The claimant worked as a beauty consultant for just 10 days. She was dismissed via WhatsApp by a manager who said she lacked initiative. With only two weeks' service, she could not bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim. Instead, she argued that her dismissal and the refusal to let her do consultation work were acts of direct race discrimination.
She pointed to three incidents: being called 'brown sugar' twice by her line manager, overhearing colleagues describe black clients as difficult, and a manager saying that race could be discussed in the workplace. The tribunal accepted these incidents happened but found they did not prove that her dismissal or work allocation was because of her race. The employer's explanation – that she lacked initiative – was considered genuine, and there was no evidence that a hypothetical comparator of a different race would have been treated differently.
What the claimant got right
Although the discrimination claim failed, the claimant succeeded on a more straightforward point: she was not paid properly. The respondent conceded that she was owed money for three training days and for being paid at a lower rate when she did therapy work. The tribunal ordered the respondent to pay £382.
This case shows that even when a discrimination claim is difficult to prove, basic employment rights like the right to be paid for all work done can still be enforced. The claimant represented herself and was able to get a result on the wages issue because she had clear evidence of the hours she worked and what she was paid.
What this means for similar claims
For anyone considering a discrimination claim after a short period of employment, this case is a reminder that the bar for proving direct discrimination is high. Offensive comments, while unacceptable, do not automatically mean that a dismissal or other treatment is because of race. The tribunal will look for a link between the protected characteristic and the treatment.
On the other hand, wage claims are often more straightforward. If you are not paid for all hours worked, or are paid at the wrong rate, you may have a claim for unlawful deductions from wages regardless of how long you worked. Keeping a record of your hours and pay is essential.
Similar cases
HR Business Partner dismissed after one month for whistleblowing: £74,540 awarded
An HR Business Partner who raised concerns about a flawed redundancy process was dismissed after just one month. The tribunal awarded £74,540 after striking out the employer's response.
Delivery manager dismissed for 'intention to steal' wins race discrimination claim
A black Caribbean delivery manager was unfairly dismissed and racially stereotyped after a returned iPhone went missing. The tribunal found Royal Mail's investigation was flawed and the claimant was treated less favourably than a hypothetical white comparator.
Agency worker's whistleblowing and harassment claims dismissed after short assignment
A housing officer who worked for Central Bedfordshire Council for just one month via an agency had her claims of whistleblowing detriment and harassment related to disability and transgender status dismissed by the Watford Employment Tribunal.
Race discrimination claim thrown out after being filed two weeks late
A tribunal dismissed a former employee's race discrimination claim after she filed it two weeks past the extended deadline, finding no credible reason for the delay and describing the claim's merits as weak.