Senior VP's race discrimination claim over 'chicken' comments dismissed
A senior financial crime expert lost his claims of race discrimination, harassment and constructive dismissal against Commerzbank AG. The tribunal found that comments about his liking for chicken were not racially motivated and that his treatment was due to performance issues, not race.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #race-discrimination
- #harassment
- #victimisation
- #constructive-dismissal
- #chicken-stereotype
- #performance-appraisal
- #bonus-reduction
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Senior VP in the Financial Crime Quality Assurance team from 31 July 2018.
- In August 2019, the claimant produced a KYC QA report with a 96% pass rate, which was later found to be flawed after a 4-eye review by Mr Buhlmann showed a 20% pass rate.
- The claimant was not appointed as functional lead of the QA team; Mr Buhlmann was appointed on 24 October 2019.
- Mr Buhlmann made two comments about the claimant liking chicken, which the claimant alleged were racially offensive stereotypes.
- The claimant resigned on 12 June 2020, claiming constructive dismissal after receiving a letter from the respondent's solicitor.
- The tribunal dismissed all claims of direct race discrimination, harassment, and victimisation.
Timeline
-
Claimant starts employment
Claimant commenced employment with Commerzbank AG as Senior VP Financial Crime Quality Assurance.
-
KYC QA report draft
Claimant sent draft KYC QA report to CLM team, stating a 96% pass rate.
-
4-eye review results
Mr Buhlmann sent his 4-eye review showing a 20% pass rate, which the claimant did not challenge in writing.
-
Meeting on KYC report
Meeting between claimant, Mr McMillan, and Mr Buhlmann; claimant did not defend his report effectively.
-
Interviews for functional lead
Mr McMillan interviewed claimant and Mr Buhlmann for the functional lead role; claimant was not selected.
-
First chicken comment
Mr Buhlmann suggested Nando's for team lunch, referencing claimant's liking for chicken.
-
Second chicken comment
Mr Buhlmann jokingly offered chicken as a reward for a desk swap.
-
Appraisal meeting
Appraisal meeting with Mr McMillan and Mr Buhlmann; claimant walked out after discussion of KYC report.
-
Grievance submitted
Claimant submitted grievance alleging race discrimination and harassment.
-
Bonus notification
Mr McMillan called claimant on sick leave to inform him of reduced bonus.
-
Grievance outcome
Mr Pertusini sent grievance outcome letter, dismissing chicken comments as cultural misunderstanding.
-
Solicitor's letter
Respondent's solicitor sent letter to claimant's representative, criticised as insulting and dismissive.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned, claiming constructive dismissal.
-
Grievance appeal outcome
Mr Clapham dismissed grievance appeal, finding chicken comments not racially motivated.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was subjected to direct race discrimination, harassment related to race, and victimisation, and whether he was constructively dismissed because of his race.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims of direct race discrimination, harassment, and victimisation. The key reasons were:
- The 'chicken' comments were not racially motivated; they were based on the claimant's own stated preference.
- The claimant's treatment, including the performance appraisal and bonus reduction, was due to his poor performance and conduct, not his race.
- The grievance process and solicitor's letter were not acts of discrimination or victimisation.
- The claimant resigned voluntarily; there was no constructive dismissal.
No compensation was awarded as the respondent won.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe you are being treated unfairly because of your race, keep a detailed record of incidents and any evidence of discriminatory motive.
- Comments about cultural stereotypes can be risky for employers, but tribunals will consider context and whether they were genuinely offensive or based on the individual's own preferences.
- Constructive dismissal claims require a repudiatory breach of contract; poor performance management or disputes over appraisals are unlikely to amount to such a breach.
- Grievance procedures that are thorough and address all concerns can help employers defend against discrimination claims.
A dispute over performance, not race
This case shows how a workplace dispute over performance and competence can be misinterpreted as discrimination. The claimant, a Senior VP with over 10 years' experience, had a disagreement with his line manager over a KYC QA report. The report initially showed a 96% pass rate, but a subsequent review found only 20%. This led to a series of events including a poor appraisal, a reduced bonus, and the claimant's resignation.
The 'chicken' comments
Two comments by a colleague about the claimant liking chicken were central to the harassment claim. The tribunal found these were not racial stereotypes but were based on the claimant's own stated preference for chicken. The colleague had suggested Nando's for a team lunch and later jokingly offered chicken as a reward. The tribunal accepted that these were innocent remarks, not motivated by race.
What the employer did right
Commerzbank AG had a clear performance management process and grievance procedure. The tribunal found that the claimant's treatment, including the appraisal and bonus reduction, was due to his performance and conduct. The grievance was investigated, and the appeal was heard. The tribunal noted that the claimant had not challenged the 4-eye review in writing and had walked out of an appraisal meeting, which undermined his credibility.
Why the result matters
This case is a reminder that not every negative comment or unfair treatment at work amounts to discrimination. Tribunals will look at the context and motive behind actions. Employees who feel they have been discriminated against should gather evidence of discriminatory intent, not just perceived unfairness. For employers, this case shows that a robust performance management system and a fair grievance process can successfully defend against discrimination claims.
Similar cases
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.
Constructive dismissal after whistleblowing and disability harassment: a partial win for former employee
A former employee who resigned after being required to attend a disciplinary investigation meeting following protected disclosures has won claims for detriment, disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation, but her constructive unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. She was awarded £12,822.78.
Audit Assistant Manager loses constructive dismissal and race discrimination claim against Grant Thornton
An Audit Assistant Manager with 2 years' service who resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan has lost his claims of constructive unfair dismissal, race discrimination and whistleblowing detriment. The tribunal found the employer had reasonable cause for its actions.
Accent mimicry and victimisation: ophthalmic technician wins race discrimination claim against Moorfields
An ophthalmic technician at Moorfields Eye Hospital was subjected to racist accent mimicry and victimised after complaining. The tribunal found she was constructively dismissed as a result of race discrimination and harassment.