Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is a 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist slur', employment tribunal says
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', an employment tribunal has found.
The term – used to describe a female who is perceived as entitled or excessively demanding – is 'pejorative', a judge said.
The ruling came in the case of black charity worker Sylvia Constance, 74, who accused her bosses of targeting her because of her race and age.
In a complaint written on her behalf, female managers at Mencap were said to have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen', having 'weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against [her]'.
But employment judge George Alliott said: 'We note [the use of] the slang term "Karen", which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.'
Referring to someone as a Karen began as an internet meme popularised during Covid. It suggests 'Karens' are the kind of women who demand to 'speak to the manager' to complain, and is also associated with excessive use of Facebook, being anti-vaccination and even a blonde bob haircut.
The hearing in Watford was told Ms Constance joined Mencap as a support worker in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, in 2016.
In 2021, Claire Wilson took over as boss of the residential home where she worked and faced 'open hostility' from Ms Constance. In October that year, Ms Wilson suspended Ms Constance over claims she had bullied residents and staff.
A week later, the employee filed a grievance. The tribunal heard that in February 2022, the disciplinary process against her was terminated with no action taken.
Ms Constance went off sick, and in April filed another grievance, written on her behalf by friend Christine Yates.
The tribunal heard that Mencap repeatedly tried to hold a meeting into her grievance. Ms Constance refused to attend, and it was held in her absence in June. The grievance was dismissed.
A year later, during which time she had not returned to work, she was sacked due to 'an irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap.
Ms Constance sued the charity for unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination and victimisation. However, all her claims were dismissed.
The judge said: 'We find that the complaints levelled against [Ms Constance] were legitimate and did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
15 minutes ago
- Times
Inside the 20-year MI6 operation to find Russian spy in its ranks
British intelligence chiefs spent 20 years hunting for a suspected Russian mole inside MI6 but failed to track down a traitor, it has been revealed. An elaborate investigation, called Operation Wedlock, is said to have spanned several continents and lasted until around 2015 before finally being labelled 'inconclusive'. The investigation was led by MI6's sister agency, MI5, in what sources described as an extraordinary case of one UK intelligence agency effectively spying on another. • Hunt for Russian spy in MI6 revealed after 30 years MI6, the Secret Intelligence Service, is the UK spy agency responsible for overseas intelligence, while MI5, the Security Service, is the domestic intelligence agency that handles national security threats. After being tipped off by the CIA about an alleged double agent in the 1990s, MI5 is said to have deployed a team of up to 35 surveillance, planning and desk officers, who travelled across the world in pursuit of the mole. Their hunt for the traitor has been documented in a recently published book, The Spy in the Archive: How One Man Tried to Kill the KGB, by the former BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera. The book says the CIA was concerned that an unknown MI6 officer had been 'turned by Moscow' and was relaying secrets to Russia. Sources with close knowledge of the operation have since disclosed to The Guardian that the UK identified a suspect within the agency and tasked MI5 with surveilling him. • How an oddball smuggled out the KGB's biggest secrets '[We were told] the target was a Russian spy … The US believed he was leaking information to the Russians. He was suspect 1A. The job was taken more seriously than any other [MI5] was involved in. Wedlock eclipsed them all,' one source said. The Wedlock team did not operate from MI5 headquarters at Thames House in Westminster and was instead based in a building in Wandsworth, south London, close to MI6's riverside building in Vauxhall. The team went to great lengths to monitor their man. MI5's technical operations team, known then as A1, is reported to have bugged the MI6 officer's home, covertly breaking in to plant listening and video devices. A live feed then beamed images back to an operations room. One source said they also parked a car outside his house, which was fitted with a camera inside a tissue box on the ledge behind the back seats. Over the years surveillance teams are said to have tracked the suspect's movements abroad, following him to cities across Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Doing so is considered very high-risk move as operating overseas is outside MI5's jurisdiction. When the team was sent into a country with real passports under false names, or somewhere without the knowledge of the local government, the agents were reportedly warned that they were 'on their own' if detained. The operation is understood to have continued, in one form or another, until at least 2015, by which time the suspect had left MI6. However, he was not thought to be working alone, a source said, with two other people, also based in London, believed to be helping him. Wedlock was described as a 'highly unusual operation … the longest in recent memory and probably the most expensive'. Despite their efforts, the MI5 team was ultimately unable to establish whether there was a mole — raising the possibility that an agent may have got away with spying for Russia. 'MI5 never got the conclusive proof it was looking for,' the source said, adding that if it was not him, then it was possible that MI6 'still has a mole to find'.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Chilling moment 'jealous' YouTuber stalks his wife to domestic abuse shelter before brutally stabbing her to death as she pushed their son in pram - as he's convicted of her murder
A 'violent, jealous, controlling' husband who stabbed his wife to death as she pushed their seven-month-old baby in a pram has been convicted of murder. 'Smiling killer' Habibur Masum, 26, tracked down Kulsuma Akter, 27, to a women's refuge after she forgot to turn off her location on Snapchat. He then confronted her on a street in Bradford, West Yorkshire last April, where in a savage broad daylight attack, he repeatedly plunged the blade into his screaming partner, stabbing her more than 25 times before slitting her throat. Afterwards, Masum was captured on CCTV grinning as he boarded a bus to make his escape, having left his wife for dead and abandoning their baby in the street. The jury heard obsessive Masum banned his wife from wearing makeup, was constantly checking her mobile phone and stopped her drinking tea, because he didn't like the drink. Her killing came just five months after 'cold-blooded' Masum had chillingly warned his wife 'I am going to murder you'. Masum, of Burnley, already pleaded guilty to manslaughter and possession of a bladed article, but had denied a charge of murder. However, a jury at Bradford Crown Court today convicted the 'abusive' 26-year-old of murder. He was also convicted of assault, making threats to kill, and stalking, and now faces life in prison. Masum wiped away tears in the dock after a jury returned a unanimous verdict following five hours and 40 minutes of deliberation. During his trial, the court heard how the couple met and married in Bangladesh, and came to the UK in 2022 after Masum obtained a student visa and enrolled on a masters course to study marketing. But the couple's relationship soon broke down in November 2023 after 18 months of marriage, which had seen Masum making threats to kill his partner in July of that year. Today it can be revealed Masum would have been locked up less than four months before the murder if warnings by the CPS had been heeded. On November 26, 2023 he was charged with assault by beating and making threats to kill against Ms Akter at their then home in Oldham. Two days earlier the jealous student had come at his terrified wife armed with a knife after flying into a rage over an innocuous text message she had received from a colleague. Masum demanded 'tell me what your relationship is with him, or I will kill you' and put the knife to her throat as she cradled their baby. Frightened for her life and fearing he would cut her throat, she clutched her son to her in a desperate hope that he wouldn't attack her. The day before, in what the trial heard was a chilling forewarning of what was to come, he had told her: 'I am going to murder you, and the police will be taking me.' Masum was arrested and his wife was allocated a social worker, confiding to her she feared he was going to kill her. When he appeared from police custody at Tameside Magistrates' Court on November 27, 2023, entering not guilty pleas, the Crown Prosecution Service argued he should remain locked up. But fatefully magistrates instead granted him bail on condition he did not contact Ms Akter and another person or go to her address. She and her son were placed in a refuge in what was meant to be a secret location in Bradford. Meanwhile her estranged husband - a free man due to the court's decision - dedicated himself to tracking her down. On March 28, 2024, West Yorkshire Police were informed she'd been receiving death threats. Officers passed 'intelligence' to colleagues in Greater Manchester on March 31, the Independent Office for Police Conduct said today. But on April 6 - two days before she was due to be rehoused - and believing her estranged husband was in Spain, Ms Atker 'felt safe to leave the refuge'. However, at 3pm Ms Akter - who was walking with a friend while pushing her seven-month-old son in a pram - was shocked to be confronted by Masum, Bradford Crown Court heard. CCTV footage played in court showed Masum walking with Ms Akter until he stopped her, then spinning her and the pram around before pulling a knife from his jacket. Prosecutor Steven Wood KC said: 'He grabs Kulsuma and pushes her into a wall, stabbing her to the body. 'You will see that Kulsuma then goes to the ground only for the defendant to launch a ferocious and deadly attack. 'When the defendant had finished stabbing her, as a final act of sheer gratuitous violence, he kicks Kulsuma before moving away, but not before ensuring that he disposed of the knife.' The court heard Ms Akter suffered multiple stab wounds to her body and face including a wound to the neck which partly cut her windpipe and severed her left jugular vein. Mr Wood said her killing represented 'cold-blooded, calculated, pre-meditated murder'. During his closing speech on Monday, the prosecutor told jurors the defendant appeared to revel in his crime, grinning after he left his wife dying. Jurors were shown Masum walking through Bradford after the attack, with Mr Woods saying there were no signs of him being 'distressed', as he had claimed in his evidence. Mr Wood told the court a close-up of Masum getting on a bus showed him smiling, which 'removed all possible doubt' about his state of mind. 'There were no tears, there was no distress. Perhaps, members of the jury, the smile you can clearly see form as he gets on that bus is as a result of him thinking at that point he's getting away. The smiling killer.' Mr Wood said that although Masum was suffering from depression at the time, this did not provide an explanation for the savage slaughter of his partner. 'It was not his depression which caused him to kill Kulsuma, it was his other longstanding personality traits of controlling behaviour, jealousy and paranoia. She had rejected him. She had to die,' he said. 'And were there any residual thought that this was about seeing his son - having left his wife literally in the gutter, bleeding to death, he leaves his son alone. 'He could so easily have walked away with him. But he knew if he walked away with that pram it would increase his chances of getting caught. 'But he very quickly got himself out of the area and down to Aylesbury. 'In the meantime he changed his appearance - shaved his beard, cut his hair, changed his clothing.' Mr Wood said the marriage between Masum and Ms Akter was 'an abusive relationship characterised by his jealousy, possessiveness and controlling behaviour with violence being both used and threatened'. 'He is a man who resorts to violence... and when he resorts to actual violence, it's with a knife,' he added. Earlier, the court heard evidence from Ms Akter's sister-in-law, who said Masum had stopped his wife wearing make-up and would regularly check her phone to see who she was talking to. A statement from Minara Begum read in court explained Ms Akter had to ask permission from her husband before going out. She said they 'both seemed happy' and Masum appeared 'quite obsessed with' Ms Akter, who started working at Park Cakes in Oldham. Ms Begum added: 'Masum was not too keen on Kulsuma working but she would worry about paying the bills. 'I told her she could enhance her beauty even more with the right make-up ... Masum would get jealous if he saw photos and told her not to do make-up any more, so she didn't.' Jurors heard how arguments soon escalated to a 'more serious level' before Ms Akter tried to escape, going to stay with her brother and sister-in-law at one point. Ms Begum said: 'He kept messaging her telling he was going to do crazy things because she was with us and not at home, and kept asking her where the kitchen knife was. 'After this happened I told Masum his behaviour was not right and their relationship should not be this way. 'Masum did not like this coming from a woman or me speaking to him this way. He did not like me very much.' Jurors heard Ms Akter returned to Masum, but arguments between them 'got worse after the baby was born' and Ms Akter 'always complained he wasn't helping her with the baby and always expected his food to be prepared after work'. However, warnings of the explosive nature of the couple's relationship were seen right at the beginning of their marriage. Jurors heard that more than a year before he murdered his wife, Masum had told a doctor he 'felt like he would kill her'. The trial heard that in August 2022 Masum was found by police at a tram station, where he had stayed all night after an argument with Ms Akter. He was taken to hospital where he told a doctor 'I feel like I would kill her' and said 'when he fights with her he feels like he is going to kill her'. Medical notes showed he 'disclosed thoughts to harm himself and his girlfriend and admitted to carrying a knife while having these thoughts'. Masum told the trial he had never carried a knife in Ms Akter's presence. Asked by his barrister Frida Hussain KC why he had made those comments at the hospital, he replied: 'I said: 'I feel I'm having some mental health issues and I would like to share something with the doctor'... I just wanted to share all that with the doctor.' The defendant, who gave evidence through a Bengali interpreter, told the court the couple had 'occasional disagreements or arguments' about when they should live together and she would 'block him' when she was angry. Masum said: 'I used to feel if I can't be with her I would die.' Masum said during the trial he had taken a knife with him on the day he killed Ms Akter because he intended to stab himself if she did not 'listen to him'. Mr Wood said the 26-year-old's threats of self-harm were 'empty threats', adding: 'He has never made an attempt on his own life, he has never harmed himself. These are examples of his emotional blackmail.' He told jurors that during the fatal attack on Ms Akter, Masum put her on the ground, stabbed her 'many, many' times, kicked her 'as a final insult'' then took hold of the back of her head and cut her throat. Mr Wood said: 'Such a brutal and violent assault by the defendant, culminating in a deliberate cutting of his wife's throat, only points to an intention to kill. That is what he wanted, that is what he did.' Today the IOPC said its investigations into Ms Akter's prior contact with both the Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire forces had found no breaches of professional standards. Its director Emily Barry said: 'Our thoughts remain with Ms Akter's family and friends, who have lost a loved one in tragic circumstances, as well as all those affected by this deeply distressing incident. 'This was a harrowing case which caused widespread understandable concern. 'It was appropriate we carried out a thorough investigation into the relevant contact between police and Ms Akter.' Masum will be sentenced next month.
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is a 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist slur', employment tribunal says
Calling a middle-aged white woman a 'Karen' is 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist', an employment tribunal has found. The term – used to describe a female who is perceived as entitled or excessively demanding – is 'pejorative', a judge said. The ruling came in the case of black charity worker Sylvia Constance, 74, who accused her bosses of targeting her because of her race and age. In a complaint written on her behalf, female managers at Mencap were said to have acted like the stereotypical 'Karen', having 'weaponised their privilege and more powerful position against [her]'. But employment judge George Alliott said: 'We note [the use of] the slang term "Karen", which is a pejorative and borderline racist, sexist and ageist term.' Referring to someone as a Karen began as an internet meme popularised during Covid. It suggests 'Karens' are the kind of women who demand to 'speak to the manager' to complain, and is also associated with excessive use of Facebook, being anti-vaccination and even a blonde bob haircut. The hearing in Watford was told Ms Constance joined Mencap as a support worker in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, in 2016. In 2021, Claire Wilson took over as boss of the residential home where she worked and faced 'open hostility' from Ms Constance. In October that year, Ms Wilson suspended Ms Constance over claims she had bullied residents and staff. A week later, the employee filed a grievance. The tribunal heard that in February 2022, the disciplinary process against her was terminated with no action taken. Ms Constance went off sick, and in April filed another grievance, written on her behalf by friend Christine Yates. The tribunal heard that Mencap repeatedly tried to hold a meeting into her grievance. Ms Constance refused to attend, and it was held in her absence in June. The grievance was dismissed. A year later, during which time she had not returned to work, she was sacked due to 'an irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with Mencap. Ms Constance sued the charity for unfair dismissal, race and age discrimination and victimisation. However, all her claims were dismissed. The judge said: 'We find that the complaints levelled against [Ms Constance] were legitimate and did not constitute a targeted racist campaign against her.'
