Legal decisions shaping the workplace — a monthly round-up of key rulings and trends.
Each month, HRreview, in partnership with employment law platform Lex HR, brings you a concise briefing on the most relevant employment tribunal developments across the UK. From landmark rulings to systemic issues such as delays and legislative reform, this new series is designed to keep HR professionals, employment lawyers and business leaders informed of the evolving legal landscape, and its real-world implications for organisations and their people.
‘Karen’ label deemed ‘borderline racist, sexist and ageist’ in Watford tribunal
An employment judge has condemned the use of the term “Karen” in tribunal proceedings, describing it as pejorative and discriminatory.
The remarks were made during a case involving 74-year-old Sylvia Constance, a black former support worker at Harpenden Mencap, who alleged unfair dismissal, victimisation, and discrimination based on age and race.
During the hearing, her representative claimed the charity had treated her in a way that reflected the “Karen” stereotype, alleging white female managers had “weaponised their privilege” against her.
Judge George Alliott rejected this argument, stating: “We note Christine Yates uses the slang term ‘Karen’, which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.”
The tribunal found in favour of Harpenden Mencap, ruling that Constance’s dismissal followed legitimate concerns about her conduct and was not discriminatory. The decision underscores the risks of informal language in legal settings, especially when attempting to characterise institutional behaviour.
Key Learning Points:
- The decision shows the risks of informal or slang language in legal proceedings, particularly when used to characterise organisational culture or behaviour.
- HR teams should review internal guidance and training on appropriate workplace language and communication standards.
- DE&I policies may need revisiting to ensure ageism, racism and sexism are explicitly addressed and clearly worded.
- It’s advisable to audit internal complaints procedures to ensure they are robust, fair and free from bias—perceived or actual.
Backlog grows as tribunal system faces test from incoming legislation
The number of open employment tribunal cases has soared by nearly a third in the past year, rising from 33,000 to 45,000, sparking renewed warnings about the system’s capacity.
The Employment Lawyers Association (ELA) has urged the Government to act now, with new legislation on the horizon expected to significantly expand workers’ rights. The Employment Rights Bill, due in 2026, will remove the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims, potentially increasing caseloads further.
Caspar Glyn KC, Chair of the ELA, said the changes risk overwhelming the system. “Once the Employment Rights Bill is law, the tribunals will drown under the weight of the increased litigation created by the new rights,” he said.
Regional disparities are also a concern, with the South and Southeast of England particularly affected by judge shortages. ELA is calling for more sitting judges, faster assessments, and an increase in tribunal funding to avoid further delays and business disruption.
Key Learning Points:
- Employers should prepare for potential delays in tribunal processes and factor this into risk management and case handling strategies.
- The removal of the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims will increase employee access to legal redress from day one, soHR policies should be reviewed accordingly.
- Documented, consistent decision-making and early resolution of disputes will become even more critical.
- Legal budgets and in-house HR resources may need reallocation to handle increased volumes and prolonged cases.
Menopause-related claims triple as disability definitions widen
Menopause is now cited in over 200 tribunal cases, up from 64 in 2022, with claims ranging from disability and sex discrimination to constructive dismissal, according to new data from law firm Nockolds.
The increase reflects growing legal recognition of menopause as a workplace issue, as well as wider interpretations of what constitutes a disability. Mental health conditions such as anxiety and depression—often linked to menopause—are increasingly seen as grounds for protection under the Equality Act.
Joanna Sutton, Principal Associate at Nockolds, said many employers remain unaware of their responsibilities. “The extent to which menopause can constitute a disability is still a major blind spot,” she warned.
She added that pressure to return to office-based work has led some employers to challenge absences or lower performance linked to menopause symptoms, fuelling workplace conflict.
Nockolds is urging organisations to create menopause policies, offer flexible working, and train managers to better support affected staff, both to retain experienced employees and to reduce the risk of tribunal claims.
Key Learning Points:
- Menopause symptoms can constitute a disability under the Equality Act, depending on their impact on day-to-day functioning.
- Employers should treat menopause as a potential workplace health issue and consider introducing dedicated policies and guidance.
- Line managers and HR should receive training on how menopause may affect performance and attendance, and how to support employees appropriately.
- Flexible working, environmental adjustments, and fair absence management can help mitigate legal risk and improve retention of experienced staff.
BBC presenters advance equal pay appeal
Four BBC news presenters — Martine Croxall, Kasia Madera, Annita McVeigh and Karin Giannone — are appealing an Employment Tribunal decision that barred them from pursuing fresh equal pay claims, arguing that a 2020 settlement addressed only past underpayment, not ongoing wage disparities.
The claimants, backed by the National Union of Journalists and represented by Thompsons Solicitors and Claire Darwin KC, say the BBC continued discriminatory pay practices post‑settlement. A tribunal ruled in May 2024 that the 2020 agreement closed the matter entirely but the appeal challenges this interpretation.
Neil Todd (Thompsons) commented: “The appeal raises important questions about how out‑of‑court settlements can cover future unlawful actions…” Meanwhile, NUJ general secretary Michelle Stanistreet said: “We do not accept that continued instances of pay discrimination can be given a free pass…”
Key Learning Points:
- Out-of-court settlements do not always prevent future claims, especially if ongoing discriminatory practices are alleged, so HR and legal teams must ensure clarity in settlement terms.
- Equal pay disputes may persist beyond initial resolutions if underlying pay structures are not reviewed and addressed.
- Organisations should audit their pay frameworks and carry out regular equal pay reviews to pre-empt claims.
- HR must ensure transparency and consistency in pay decisions, particularly when they follow previous legal disputes.
