An employment tribunal judge has said that referring to someone as a “Karen” is borderline racist, sexist and ageist. The comments came during a case brought by a former employee against Harpenden Mencap, a charity supporting adults with learning disabilities.
Employment judge George Alliott said that the slang term, often used in a derogatory way to describe middle-aged white women perceived as entitled or demanding, carries pejorative connotations and crosses into discriminatory territory. His remarks followed claims made during a tribunal hearing in Watford.
The case was brought by 74-year-old Sylvia Constance, a former support worker at the charity, who alleged unfair dismissal, direct race and age discrimination and victimisation. Constance, who is black, claimed her dismissal on 13 June 2023 followed a campaign of racial and age-related bias.
Harpenden Mencap had previously suspended her following allegations of emotional or psychological abuse of a resident and bullying of colleagues. The tribunal ultimately found in favour of the employer, concluding that the actions taken were justified and not discriminatory in nature.
 |
Get our essential daily HR news and updates. |
Allegations of bias and contested language
Constance’s representative, Christine Yates, had submitted written statements in support of her client, accusing Harpenden Mencap of operating in a way that mirrored the “Karen” stereotype. Yates alleged the charity’s leadership had “weaponised their privilege” against Constance and facilitated a culture where both staff and residents could collude in discriminatory behaviour.
Yates wrote, “The respondents have acted like the stereotypical ‘Karen’, having weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against the complainant, making up and suspending the complainant for numerous fictitious infringements.”
She further argued that white female managers at the charity had enabled what she described as misogynistic and racist narratives against the claimant by cooperating with male residents.
Judge Alliott rejected these characterisations. In his ruling, he criticised the use of the term “Karen”, saying, “We note Christine Yates uses the slang term ‘Karen’, which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.”
Dismissal ruled legitimate by the tribunal
In his findings, the judge dismissed Constance’s claims of discrimination, saying the decisions made by Harpenden Mencap were reasonable and not indicative of racial or age-based targeting.
The tribunal found that the suspension and eventual dismissal of Constance were prompted by legitimate concerns regarding her conduct, rather than any discriminatory agenda. The complaints from colleagues and residents were deemed to be genuine and not fabricated for the purpose of victimisation.
Judge Alliott’s statement on the term “Karen” adds to an evolving legal conversation around acceptable discourse within professional and legal proceedings. While the term is often used informally online, its inclusion in formal tribunal documents was viewed as inappropriate and unhelpful in the context of serious allegations.
