Race discrimination claims fail for probationary housing assistant
A probationary housing assistant's claims of race discrimination and harassment against One Housing Group Limited were dismissed by the tribunal, which found no evidence that her treatment was because of her race.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #race-discrimination
- #direct-discrimination
- #harassment
- #probationary-employment
- #constructive-dismissal-not-pursued
- #time-limits
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Housing Assistant from 7 August 2019 to 14 February 2020.
- The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was struck out for lack of two years' qualifying service.
- The claimant alleged race discrimination and harassment by her line manager and HR head.
- The tribunal found that the respondent's treatment of the claimant was not because of her race.
- The claimant resigned after a meeting about her annual leave request and performance concerns.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant began work as Housing Assistant for One Housing Group.
-
Performance concerns raised
Ms Crabtree emailed the claimant about organisation, time management and confidence issues.
-
Desk move incident
Ms Crabtree told the claimant to move back to HR desk; claimant felt humiliated.
-
BACS error attribution
Claimant's name was wrongly entered on a spreadsheet for a payroll error she did not make.
-
Whispered remark
Ms Judge whispered 'how does she not know that?' within claimant's earshot.
-
Probation review meeting
Ms Crabtree and Ms Haile held a probation review; claimant's probation was extended.
-
Meeting and resignation
Ms Judge and Ms Haile met claimant about annual leave and performance; claimant resigned via email.
-
Employment end
Claimant's resignation took effect.
-
Early conciliation started
Claimant contacted ACAS for early conciliation.
-
Claim presented
Claimant submitted her ET1 claim to the Employment Tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was subjected to direct race discrimination and/or race discrimination harassment by her managers, and if so, whether time limits should be extended.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all of the claimant's race discrimination and harassment claims. It found that the treatment she complained of—including a desk move, a whispered remark, and performance management—was not because of her race. The claims were also out of time, and the tribunal declined to extend the time limits.
No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Probationary employees with less than two years' service cannot claim unfair dismissal, but can still bring discrimination claims.
- To succeed in a race discrimination claim, you must show that the treatment was because of your race, not just that it was unfair or upsetting.
- Discrimination claims must be brought within three months of the act complained of; delays can be fatal even if the claim is otherwise strong.
- Tribunals will not extend time limits unless it is just and equitable to do so, and the burden is on the claimant to justify the delay.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the challenges faced by employees on probation who believe they have been discriminated against. The claimant, a Housing Assistant, had only been with One Housing Group for about six months when she resigned after a series of incidents she felt were racially motivated. However, the tribunal found no connection between her treatment and her race. The incidents—such as being told to move desks, a whispered remark, and performance concerns—were seen as management actions within the normal range, not discriminatory.
What the respondent could have done differently
While the respondent successfully defended the claims, the case highlights the importance of clear documentation and fair process. The tribunal noted that some of the management actions, such as the desk move and the attribution of a payroll error, were poorly handled. Better communication and more sensitive management could have avoided the perception of discrimination and the subsequent tribunal claim.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case serves as a reminder that discrimination claims require evidence of a causal link between the protected characteristic and the treatment. Even where an employee feels unfairly treated, without that link, the claim will fail. Additionally, the strict time limits for bringing claims mean that employees must act promptly. The tribunal declined to extend the time limit here, as the claimant had not provided a good reason for the delay. For employers, the case underscores the importance of training managers to handle probationary employees fairly and to avoid any conduct that could be perceived as discriminatory.
Similar cases
Redundancy and racial nickname claims dismissed as out of time
An employment tribunal dismissed claims of unfair dismissal and racial harassment from two former employees of the UAE Embassy, finding that their discrimination complaints were brought too late and that a redundancy selection based on performance was not tainted by race.
Civil enforcement officer dismissed for assaulting member of public: dismissal fair
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a civil enforcement officer who assaulted a member of the public by knocking a phone from their hand. All race discrimination and harassment claims were also rejected.
Friendly banter or harassment? 'Gypsy' remarks in private chats not discrimination
A tribunal dismissed race discrimination and harassment claims from a Customer Insight Analyst who was called 'gypsy' by a colleague in private WhatsApp messages, finding the remarks were made in a friendly context and the claims were out of time.
Race discrimination claim dismissed after social worker missed time limit
An experienced social worker's race discrimination and constructive dismissal claims against Devon County Council were dismissed because she presented her claim too late, and the tribunal refused to extend time.