K Davies v Oscar Mayer Ltd (1600353/2025), the Employment Tribunal was asked to decide whether an employee’s dismissal for alleged racial harassment was fair.
The employer, Oscar Mayer Ltd, dismissed Mr Davies for what it described as racial harassment, after he greeted a colleague with the phrase “Top of the morning to ya” in a mock Irish accent. The company argued that such a remark should be treated as seriously as any other unwanted, stereotypical comment that could amount to harassment.
Mr Davies, however, was a longstanding employee with over 25 years’ service and an otherwise clean record. He believed the decision to dismiss him was unjust, particularly as it came shortly before his expected redundancy.
The Background
Mr Davies had been employed by Oscar Mayer since 1997 and was among around 100 employees selected for redundancy in September 2024. He had already raised a grievance claiming the redundancy process was unfair and that he was being singled out.
Just weeks before his redundancy date, while sitting in the site’s works cabin listening to the Irish band Grace, he greeted a colleague, who was escorting an external auditor — with “Top of the morning to ya!”. When the colleague ignored him, he repeated the phrase several times.
The employer viewed this as racial harassment, arguing that the auditor’s appearance (red hair, beard, tied-back hair) could be stereotypically Irish, and that Mr Davies was mocking him.
What the Tribunal Found
Employment Judge T Vincent Ryan found that the dismissal was unfair. While Mr Davies’ behaviour was described as “reprehensible” and “goading”, it did not amount to racial harassment, nor was the employer’s response reasonable.
The Tribunal criticised the company’s approach on several grounds:
- Assumptions, not evidence:
The employer never confirmed the auditor’s nationality or ethnicity. Its entire case was based on the perception that he “looked Irish”. - Flawed investigation:
The person investigating the complaint was already the subject of a grievance raised by Mr Davies — raising questions of bias. - Failure to consider mitigation:
Mr Davies’ long service and previously unblemished record were overlooked. - Lack of proportionality:
The Tribunal said dismissal was outside the “band of reasonable responses” open to a fair employer.
Ultimately, the Tribunal found that Mr Davies had been unfairly dismissed. While his behaviour justified some form of disciplinary action, it did not justify summary dismissal. His compensation was reduced by 15% to reflect his contributory fault.
Oscar Mayer Ltd was ordered to pay him £16,490.82.
The Judge’s Comments
Judge Ryan emphasised that the decision was not a reflection of “wokeness” or “anti-wokeness” but a straightforward application of the law under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
He added:
“The Claimant succeeded with this claim of Unfair Dismissal in accordance with established legal principles… The judgment does not set a precedent; its application is specific to the facts of this case.”
Key Lessons for Employers
This case serves as a reminder that:
- Investigations must be thorough and impartial.
Avoid assumptions about intent or background. Establish the facts and interview all relevant parties before making conclusions. - Context and intent matter.
Not every inappropriate remark amounts to harassment — but employers must still handle them sensitively and proportionately. - Consider length of service and disciplinary history.
Long-serving employees with clean records deserve balanced consideration before dismissal is imposed. - Ensure procedural fairness.
Especially where redundancy, grievances, and disciplinary processes overlap — each should be managed separately and fairly.
The Full Judgment
You can read the full written reasons here: 👉 K Davies v Oscar Mayer Ltd – Written Reasons (PDF)
At Richard Reed Solicitors, we advise both employers and employees on all aspects of workplace investigations, disciplinary procedures, and unfair dismissal claims.
Cases like Davies v Oscar Mayer Ltd highlight how important it is to handle allegations fairly, follow proper process, and consider context before reaching a decision.
If you’d like tailored advice on managing disciplinary matters, redundancy, or employee relations in your workplace, our Employment Law team is here to help, please get in touch
