Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Adijat  Alimi

Tesco Ireland

Representatives

Self-Represented at Hearing but previously advised by James Sweeney.

Michael Kinsley BL instructed by Aideen Smyth,  Tesco Ireland, Legal Department

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00070383-001

29/03/2025

The issue in contention is an Equal Status compliant of Racial Discrimination, Harassment, Victimisation, Direct and Indirect Discrimination against a major Supermarket Chain - TESCO.

The Complainant is a Lady living in the Irish Midlands.

The alleged incident took place on the 30th September 2024 while the Complainant was shopping in a local Branch of the Supermarket

The Complainant was self-represented but was assisted by her detailed complaint form and her letters /e mails to TESCO. She was being advised by Mr J Sweeney who was not in attendance at the Hearing.

In her lengthy Oral testimony, the Complainant stated that on the morning of the 30th September 2024 she was in TESCO Supermarket, Kinnegad. She was queuing, in a respectful manner at the Reduced-Price Section of the Store. The Respondent Employee ,Ms LB, was stocking the Shelves. Without any provocation Ms LB shouted aggressively at her to “move back” and suggested that the Complainant was always there trying to get discounted items. She implied that the Complainant had no right to be there. She was shamed and insulted by the actions/words of Ms LB.

She requested a Floor Manager to assist her - a Mr E. He did not de-escalate the situation and Ms LB returned and shouted at her with a Racial comment. Ms LB had used a Racial insult towards the Complainant. The overall Shop Manager, Mr CC, then came on the scene. He also did nothing to assist other than to say he “would investigate” the incident. He was in breach of TESCO protocols by not bringing the Complainant to a private area and spoke to her instead on the open Shop Floor.

Later that afternoon after seeking advice from her Priest and family she had returned to the Store to seek official complaint forms. Mr CC informed her that there were no forms for this type of incident. He suggested that she write to TESCO Customer Service setting out her complaints and that Customer Services would deal with the issue. She then wrote a lengthy letter to TESCO Head Office on the 1st October 2024 setting out her complaints.

In her Oral Testimony the Complainant became quite emotional and was somewhat confused in her exact recollections. Nevertheless she was adamant, under sworn oath, that she had been treated very badly by Ms LB and later by her superiors in TESCO.

The Respondent was represented by Mr Kinsley BL, supported by a number of Shop Witness including Ms LB and Shop Managers referred to in the Complaint. A playing of the relevant CCTV footage also took place.

In an opening argument Mr Kinsley pointed out that the Complainant had not complied with/observed section 21 of the Equal Status Act 2000 as regards proper notifications to the Respondent Form ES 1 and affording them a proper notice to reply via Form ES 2. Accordingly, the WRC had no jurisdiction to hear the case. The Adjudicator reserved his position on this argument.

The Respondent argued that the issue arose as the Complainant was overbearing and invading the personal space of the Staff member Ms LB who was stocking the reduced-price shelves. Stocking these shelves can often become quite fraught for staff involved as many customers, anxious to secure bargains, almost create a “rugby scrum” at the shelves & at the floor trolley the staff member is using to carry items to the shelves.

In this instance Ms Lb simply asked all customers to “step back” to give her room to work. There were two other customers present at the time - one was distinctive as she was wearing a religious Head Covering. Ms LB gave a detailed Oral testimony of her Recollections. She had a limited Food Safety time frame to stack the shelves with temperature-controlled items. The Customers began taking items from her stock trolley and crowding her out. She had simply asked then to back off and give her space. There was no Racial or any other context to her remarks. She had overheard the Complainant telling Mr E, the Supervisor, that she, the Complainant, was a Racist. She had got angry at this at shouted to Mr E that she was not a Racist.

Sometime later in mid-Summer she had casually met the Complainant in the Shop, apologised to her if she, the Complainant, had felt upset at the time of the earlier incident. She was not admitting any wrong -she just did not like, on a human basis, the Complainant felling upset.

The Respondent then played CCTV footage of the incident. The footage clearly showed Ms LB being crowded by both the Complainant and the lady in the Head Covering. Both appeared to be taking items from the trolley that Ms LB was using to carry stock. While there was no sound the visible actions of Ms LB appeared very reasonable in asking /gesturing for space to work, as she was being obviously pressurised by both Customers. Under oath she testified that she had not used any Racial Language or Swear words in asking the customers to “stand back”.

The Complainant accepted that the Video featured her in the Shop.

In addition, Oral Testimony was given by Mr CC, Store Manager for the Company and was also supported by written witness statements from other staff involved. All corroborated the evidence of Ms LB.

Ms LB came across to the Hearing as a genuine, sincere individual who bore no malice or evident racial prejudice towards the Complainant.

Mr Kinsley cited relevant case law precedents especially Adj-00023569 Mukherji v Marks and Spencer and DEC-SC010-031 Ennis v O’Mahony’s Football and Hurling Club.

While reserving the position on the ES1 and ES 2 forms the CCTV footage was crucial.  The footage and the witness evidence from colleagues strongly corroborated the testimony under Oath of Ms LB.

Accordingly, the complaints of Racial Discrimination, Harassment, Victimisation, Direct and Indirect Discrimination under the Equal Status Act,2000 lack a sound Legal Foundation – a Prima Facie basis and have to be deemed unsuccessful.

ES Discrimination, Racial Grounds.