Caravan firm get £5,000 penalty after boss made 'offensive' remark
Simon Howard, marketing director of Bailey of Bristol, made the remark to an employee who has since left the business
Bailey caravans directors true feelings towards people with disabilities. Shame on you
- Thread starter Motorhomedave
- Start date
- Status
Considering he and his brother own the company I would very much assume so.
Shocking attitude to disabilities
Shocking attitude to disabilities
Totally unacceptable on all levels, especially from the owner!
I think people should seriously consider not using them. An attitude like this towards disabilities is awful.
#BeKind
#BeKind
Parksy
Moderator
The ill advised comment made by the director was unacceptable in today's climate.
The industrial tribunal quite rightly awarded the disabled employee £5000 for hurt feelings according to the newspaper report.
Her claim for constructive unfair dismissal was rejected.
I have a great deal of sympathy with disabled people who are discriminated against, I have a blue badge parking permit and I regularly park in disabled spaces when they're available.
I can't help wondering however if the disabled woman has won a pyrrhic victory.
She was awarded five grand because the insensitive remarks from the boss hurt her feelings, but she no longer has her job, she left because it would appear that she wanted to make a much bigger issue of the crass remark, but she didn't succeed.
Meanwhile Simon Howard is still a company director at Bailey, the five grand wouldn't put a dent in the Bailey finances and no doubt the company will carry on after lockdown without the services of the disgruntled ex employee.
As a disabled person if the same thing happened to me I'd have expected an apology and a commitment to respect people with disabilities, but I'd have left it at that.
The industrial tribunal quite rightly awarded the disabled employee £5000 for hurt feelings according to the newspaper report.
Her claim for constructive unfair dismissal was rejected.
I have a great deal of sympathy with disabled people who are discriminated against, I have a blue badge parking permit and I regularly park in disabled spaces when they're available.
I can't help wondering however if the disabled woman has won a pyrrhic victory.
She was awarded five grand because the insensitive remarks from the boss hurt her feelings, but she no longer has her job, she left because it would appear that she wanted to make a much bigger issue of the crass remark, but she didn't succeed.
Meanwhile Simon Howard is still a company director at Bailey, the five grand wouldn't put a dent in the Bailey finances and no doubt the company will carry on after lockdown without the services of the disgruntled ex employee.
As a disabled person if the same thing happened to me I'd have expected an apology and a commitment to respect people with disabilities, but I'd have left it at that.
I think the larger picture is the lady standing up for herself and others by not accepting horrid remarks, had she just accepted this what’s to stop the next disabled employees being treated just as badly?
Parksy
Moderator
Having read the newspaper report I can't help feeling that perhaps there is more than meets the eye in this case.
The employee was in the habit of parking her car in front of the main office.
There were disabled parking spaces available so why didn't she use them?
The tribunal heard that the director had used the offensive term in jest.
That doesn't excuse him but some people accept a joke and others don't.
As a disabled driver and disabled parking bay user I've often referred to these spaces in a jocular manner, my joke name for these spaces could be considered by some to be 'offensive' but as a disabled person myself if I 'offend' somebody with a joke it doesn't cost me £5000.
People are very quick to take offence these days, but if you inadvertently 'offend' somebody guess what?
Nothing happens!
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but the fact that the claim for unfair dismissal was thrown out is very telling for me.
The employee was in the habit of parking her car in front of the main office.
There were disabled parking spaces available so why didn't she use them?
The tribunal heard that the director had used the offensive term in jest.
That doesn't excuse him but some people accept a joke and others don't.
As a disabled driver and disabled parking bay user I've often referred to these spaces in a jocular manner, my joke name for these spaces could be considered by some to be 'offensive' but as a disabled person myself if I 'offend' somebody with a joke it doesn't cost me £5000.
People are very quick to take offence these days, but if you inadvertently 'offend' somebody guess what?
Nothing happens!
I'm playing devil's advocate here, but the fact that the claim for unfair dismissal was thrown out is very telling for me.
I worked for Bailey for many years and to be honest this type of behavior doesn't surprise me. It is one of the reasons I left along with the poor product quality. It has several directors two of which are brothers, the Howard brothers. So if I'm understanding this article correctly Simon Howard referred to someone as a Raspberry Ripple, they complained about it, and his Brother Nick Howard heard the complaint. Sounds corrupt to me.
My wife has mobility issues and rightly so has a blue badge. We have often arrived at the supermarket to find no blue badge spaces free, but the worst was about two years ago when a builders van raced to get the last a space by going against the one way system just as we were about to manoeuvre into it. His language was not printable. We had to use a normal space some distance from the entrance.
By the time we had found a space and got out to go into the shop, as we approached the entrance the man came out, with just a couple of items, and I took my phone out and filmed him getting into the van. As he pulled out he saw us and again used unprintable language and drove off. I was able to get the name and phone number of the company, (quite a large business in the area) and the next day I phoned them. I was put through to the HR manager, who asked me to send the footage in.
A couple of days latter we received a letter from the MD apologising for his employees actions and language. Apparently the person was easily identified from the footage, had no permission to be using the van, and had been dismissed. The next day we received a bouquet of flowers.
By the time we had found a space and got out to go into the shop, as we approached the entrance the man came out, with just a couple of items, and I took my phone out and filmed him getting into the van. As he pulled out he saw us and again used unprintable language and drove off. I was able to get the name and phone number of the company, (quite a large business in the area) and the next day I phoned them. I was put through to the HR manager, who asked me to send the footage in.
A couple of days latter we received a letter from the MD apologising for his employees actions and language. Apparently the person was easily identified from the footage, had no permission to be using the van, and had been dismissed. The next day we received a bouquet of flowers.
A friend of mine has had problem after problem with their Bailey caravan due to poor build quality. When you buy a brand new caravan you don't expect it to be bodged throughout with repairs and everything taped up with sticky tape peeling off everywhere. Not to mention the water leak and non existant customer service team they have. Sounds like the place is a shambles from the top to the bottom if you ask me.
Whilst what Mr Howard said was unacceptable as far as the newspaper report says he did not refer directly to her as being a “Raspberry Ripple” he was referring to the disabled parking bay which she should have used. As far as the company’s internal hearing of the complaint was concerned it lacked independence, surprising in such a well established business; but it wasn’t corrupt. What it does show is an absolute lack of understanding of the laws relating to discrimination in the workplace and how to manage justified complaints, and which if Mr Howard had shown the attributes required of an individual and a manager should never have arisen in the first place.
Last edited:
Mr Howard admits to using the terminology and it's clearly deeply offensive, not what you would expect from the person in charge of marketing for the company. In the article, it states 'We truly care about our employees and work hard to ensure that everyone who comes to work can do so in a safe, respectful and collaborative environment'.
This is clearly not the case if a senior director and owner are displaying these behaviors what example does is set to the rest of the workforce. I worked for Bailey for a number of years and it is like stepping back into the 70s. In fact, they could make a film of it and call it 'Carry on Caravaning'
This kind of discrimination goe on all the time in industry in the military and in day to day life it happens but Mr Hammond was out of order and should of said it out of ears hot if he is that way inclined personally being thick skinned these days is not an excuse to come out with an offensive statement if I heard the N word or the P word being used I would say so what but I have a friend who is a black guy from the caribbean and he is the topchef at one of our food factories he has lived in our town for over 30 years but a few months ago I was talking to him in weitherspoons forhalf an hour then he left with his daughter, the next minute the chap came over and started to slagged him off in front of me and my mate, having just been treated in LeicesterRoyal by everyone who was not white got my bugle up and he very nearly came unstuck but he was told in no uncertainway what a bigoted pig he was,
The remark was in bad taste, but unless it was one of a number it could simply be an unintentional slip of the tongue and does not prove prejudice to me.. I am afraid that I do find that many people are jumping on the band wagon a bit with these claims and I find damages for one single remark is going too far in a society where people are litigating far too much. I know many people do disagree with me but having had to work on some of the claims words almost failed me sometimes at the way people jumped on innocent remarks to try and get money.
I think we are almost all guilty of something similar when replying to people and things easily can be misinterpreted. I know I have said things that might have offended when nothing was intended, but it could be seen differently if people were minded to take offence.
I also find myself lost with some terms that have become offensive without me even becoming aware of it. Conversations can be a problem these days and personally I think things have gone far too far. Frankly for £5,000 people can call me anything they want.
I think we are almost all guilty of something similar when replying to people and things easily can be misinterpreted. I know I have said things that might have offended when nothing was intended, but it could be seen differently if people were minded to take offence.
I also find myself lost with some terms that have become offensive without me even becoming aware of it. Conversations can be a problem these days and personally I think things have gone far too far. Frankly for £5,000 people can call me anything they want.
Parksy
Moderator
I agree.
We are in danger of reaching the situation where a person at work would need to be on their guard at all times and to avoid making any jokes or indulging in friendly banter in case it is misinterpreted and someone takes 'offence'.
The politically correct approach governs what can be posted on this forum.
Jokes can be a minefield, we have to be careful what we write and moderators have to check everything to make sure that there is very little chance of anyone potentially causing 'offence'.
It's possible to continue to enjoy using the forum because we are able to check and alter what we have written before we submit it for publication online.
I strongly suspect that most forum members speak and behave differently from the paragons of political correctness that we see on these message boards, in 'real life' I know that I do.
Racism and bigotry have no place in our society, but while I'm not trying to excuse the Bailey's directors crass insensitivity, the employee is five grand richer but she no longer has her job.
The director involved has apologised and the company paid up, the incident actually took place in 2017 but has only recently been publicised.
The employee struck a blow, but at what cost?
As Parksy has suggested, I also think there is more to this story than has been published.
I have no doubt the reported remark occured, and in my view the company was correctly brought to book for it as it was used by a company director, on the premises and related to an employee whom they clearly knew was disabled.
It concerns me that any one should want to use a colloquialism that clearly was used to hide the word he instinctively wanted to use, which in itself is now socially and morally unacceptable. It leaves me wondering if it shows this person has an inherent discrimination attitude towards the disabled?
There is lots we don't know about the rest of the incidents, and the fact the claim for constructive dismissal was rejected strongly suggests there was more going on than the headlines show.
I have no doubt the reported remark occured, and in my view the company was correctly brought to book for it as it was used by a company director, on the premises and related to an employee whom they clearly knew was disabled.
It concerns me that any one should want to use a colloquialism that clearly was used to hide the word he instinctively wanted to use, which in itself is now socially and morally unacceptable. It leaves me wondering if it shows this person has an inherent discrimination attitude towards the disabled?
There is lots we don't know about the rest of the incidents, and the fact the claim for constructive dismissal was rejected strongly suggests there was more going on than the headlines show.
Or that Bailey invested in a legal team where as most individuals represent themselves. Remember OJ Simpson, he had good lawyers!
Parksy
Moderator
w
We can express our disgust at the distasteful remark, but the verdict has been given and there's nothing to be gained by trying to second guess the decisions reached by the industrial tribunal.
Whatever happened, the case is over and done with and a settlement awarded.
We can express our disgust at the distasteful remark, but the verdict has been given and there's nothing to be gained by trying to second guess the decisions reached by the industrial tribunal.
Parksy
Moderator
If you had read what I had written I wrote that there's nothing to be gained by second guessing the decisions of the tribunal.
There's a difference.
I can always remember having a yearly driving assestment and when the assessor got in to the cab he started writing a few details and he said you don't use one of them do you there for cripples only, he was refering to the knobs what seemed popular at the time that bolted on the steering wheel, have I stll got time to sue,
Well, personally I don't think a director of a large company should be making those remarks and should be held accountable for and the employee should have the opportunity for someone other than his brother hearing her case. As I said I used to work there so I can empathise with the type of culture it is and the type of people they are. Do you have such an insight have you or do you work for Bailey of Bristol????
Parksy
Moderator
Calm down!
I agree that the remark was disgraceful but the case has been heard and a judgement given which clearly held the director to account.
You having a pop at me on this forum won't make any difference to what happened.
If you feel so strongly about it, why not write to Bailey instead of venting your spleen at me on the forum?
- Status
Facebook
Twitter