Understanding protected acts in the workplace

In a recent case, the Employment Appeal Tribunal examined whether grievances raised by a claimant constituted protected acts, which are essential for victimisation claims. The case involved Ms Kokomane, who, after alleging unfair treatment and raising grievances at Boots Management Services, claimed her grievances were “protected acts” under the Equality Act 2010. The Tribunal initially ruled against her, arguing her claims did not explicitly reference race discrimination. However, upon appeal, the EAT found that the Employment Tribunal had misconstrued the definition of a protected act. They emphasised that a complaint need not explicitly mention discrimination for it to qualify as such.

As Beth Hamilton notes, “This case is a stark reminder to employers of the need to consider any potential discrimination complaints in the round.” The EAT determined that the context of Ms Kokomane’s complaints should have guided the Tribunal’s assessment. The EAT further clarified that the tribunal should evaluate how the employer would interpret the complaint given the broader context, including the racial composition of the workforce and the nature of discussions during grievance meetings.

This ruling underscores the necessity for employers to adopt a broader perspective when addressing complaints, ensuring they do not overlook potential protected acts that could lead to claims of victimisation. By recognising the importance of context and the broader implications of employee grievances, employers can prevent costly legal processes and better support their workforce.