Trainee duct fitter awarded £27,624 after race discrimination over pay and work allocation
A black trainee duct fitter was paid less and given more labouring work than white comparators. The tribunal awarded £27,624 for race discrimination and unpaid wages.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a trainee duct fitter from 11 August 2020 to 29 October 2021.
- The claimant is black and of Brazilian Portuguese ethnic origin.
- The respondent failed to increase the claimant's hourly rate after his probation ended, while white Eastern European comparators were paid more.
- The claimant was required to do more labouring work than white comparators.
- The claimant was dismissed after raising a pay dispute and approaching the main contractor's site office.
- The respondent made an unauthorised deduction from wages for September 2021 and underpaid holiday pay.
Timeline
-
Interview and job offer
Mr Dos Santos had a telephone interview and was offered the role of trainee duct fitter at £10 per hour, with a probationary period of six months.
-
Employment commenced
Mr Dos Santos started work for the respondent.
-
Pay rise to £11 per hour
Mr Dos Santos's pay was increased to £11 per hour, reflecting his progression to Grade 2.
-
Email raising concerns
Mr Dos Santos emailed Mr McCann about pay disparities and lack of training, stating that non-Romanians lag behind.
-
Pay rise to £11.50 per hour
Mr Dos Santos's pay was increased to £11.50 per hour, outside the stated grading structure.
-
Email about underpayment
Mr Dos Santos emailed Mr McCann and Ms Knight about being underpaid for September 2021.
-
Further emails and request for contract
Mr Dos Santos sent emails reiterating his pay concerns and requesting a copy of his contract.
-
Dismissal
After Mr Dos Santos approached the main contractor's site office, Mr McCann emailed him stating he was no longer employed.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was directly discriminated against because of his race in relation to pay and the type of work he was given, and whether he was unfairly dismissed for raising a pay dispute.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's race discrimination claims in part, but dismissed his unfair dismissal claim.
Key reasons:
- The claimant, a black trainee duct fitter of Brazilian Portuguese origin, was paid less than white Eastern European comparators after his probation ended and was required to do more labouring work.
- The employer gave no credible explanation for the disparity, so the tribunal inferred discrimination.
- The claimant's dismissal was not unfair because he had approached the main contractor's site office, which the employer reasonably treated as a breach of protocol.
Compensation:
- Financial losses (agreed): £2,179.17 plus £343.88 interest
- Injury to feelings: £21,000 plus £3,737.42 interest
- Unpaid holiday pay: £364
- Total: £27,624.47
Lessons & takeaways
- If you suspect you are being paid less or given worse work because of your race, keep a record of comparators and raise the issue in writing.
- Employers must be able to provide a clear, non-discriminatory reason for pay differences between employees doing similar work.
- Approaching a client or main contractor directly about a dispute can be treated as gross misconduct, even if you feel your employer is ignoring you.
- Race discrimination claims can succeed even without direct evidence of racist comments, if the employer cannot explain the difference in treatment.
What this case shows
A black trainee duct fitter with 14 months' service was paid less and given more labouring work than white colleagues from Eastern Europe. When he raised the issue internally and then approached the main contractor's site office, he was dismissed. The tribunal found that the employer had discriminated against him on grounds of race, but that the dismissal itself was fair because going to the client was a serious breach of protocol.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer failed to explain why the claimant's hourly rate stayed at £11.50 while comparators were paid more. It also gave him more manual work without a clear reason. Had the employer kept proper records of pay decisions and work allocation, and provided a transparent grading system, it could have defended the claims. Instead, the lack of evidence led the tribunal to infer discrimination.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that race discrimination can be subtle — unequal pay and work allocation are common forms. It also shows that raising a grievance does not give an employee carte blanche to bypass their employer and go to a client. The compensation of over £27,000 reflects the seriousness of the discrimination, including £21,000 for injury to feelings.
Similar cases
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
Short-service engineer loses unfair dismissal claim but wins holiday pay
A static maintenance engineer with under two years' service could not bring an unfair dismissal claim, but the tribunal awarded £803.88 in unpaid holiday pay.
Former employee's race discrimination claim dismissed but holiday pay awarded
A former employee's claim for unfair dismissal and race discrimination failed due to time limits, but the tribunal awarded £243.54 for unpaid holiday pay.