Couple sue Waitrose for race discrimination after being fired over ‘tanned skin’

A couple tried to take Waitrose to an employment tribunal for race discrimination after they were sacked for taking an unauthorised holiday which was rumbled by their suspiciously ‘tanned skin’.

Peter Hedger and Katerina Dimitrova claimed the colour of their skin and Dimitrova’s Bulgarian background were used to create a ‘degrading and humiliating’ atmosphere when they got home.

They travelled to Dimitrova’s home country of Bulgaria in late August 2023, during a short period of authorised leave.

The pair had also put in leave requests for early September 2023, but they were were refused.

It’s thought they may have stayed in Bulgaria for as long as two months while telling managers they had to miss work because they were ‘house-hunting in the UK’.

The tribunal heard the couple contacted their branch several times over those two months, but on ‘none of these occasions did they mention that they were abroad’.

‘It was only after they returned to the UK that they disclosed that they had travelled to Bulgaria towards the end of August 2023’, Employment Judge Choudry wrote in his judgment on the case in February.

The couple’s claim was blasted as ‘hopelessly vague’ but it was suggested their supervisors had become suspicious after they returned to work with ‘tanned skin’.

Hedger and Dimitrova claimed ‘Waitrose managers created an environment which was hostile, offensive and degrading and humiliating’.

They appealed their dismissal but were told the ‘evidence showed [they] had not been open and honest with their branch about the reasons for absence, had not let theirmanagers know of the absence at the soonest opportunity and had not informed their managers that they would be in Bulgaria’.

Unauthorised absence was listed as an example of gross misconduct in Waitrose’s employee handbook.

Judge Choudry pointed out that Dimitrova’s claim did not even mention an ‘allegation of detrimental treatment because of her nationality or national origins’.

Meanwhile, the judge added, Bulgaria was only mentioned once in Hedger’s claim, in a quote from a letter explaining why his appeal against his dismissal had been denied.

‘I suspect you went to Bulgaria during your authorised leave and decided to stay longer’, the letter stated.

The claim was thrown out in February on the grounds it had ‘no reasonable prospect of success’.

Judge Choudry wrote: ‘It is difficult to fully understand the basis upon which the claimants are putting forward their complaints relation to nationality/national origins.

‘The fact that they were in Bulgaria was mentioned several times in the
disciplinary process.

‘The fact that they were in Bulgaria was connected with Ms Dimitrova’s nationality and national origins.

‘However, the reason for dismissal was not due to them being in Bulgaria but because they were believed to be absent from work for no good reason and not to be house-hunting in the UK because they were abroad at the relevant time, having stayed abroad after a period of authorised annual leave.’

The pair also tried to amend their claim to allege they were discriminated against on the grounds of sex and/or sexual orientation but the request was refused.

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.

For more stories like this, check our news page.