Latest news with #Peter Hedger
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Telegraph
Waitrose workers sacked over ‘unauthorised holiday' sued for race discrimination
Two Waitrose employees attempted to sue the supermarket after they were fired for going on an unauthorised trip abroad. Peter Hedger and Katerina Dimitrova claimed they were victims of racial discrimination because of their 'tanned skin', according to MailOnline. The couple went on holiday to Bulgaria, Ms Dimitrova's home country, before extending their stay without their employer's permission. They are believed to have spent up to two months in Bulgaria while telling bosses they were house hunting in the UK. At no point did they mention that they were abroad. When the couple returned to work, managers reportedly found their extended absence suspicious because of their 'tanned appearance'. Unauthorised absence John Lewis, which owns the supermarket chain, dismissed the couple for gross misconduct, citing unauthorised absence as their reason for doing so. 'The [couple] put in a leave request for Sept 2 2023, which was refused,' a virtual employment tribunal held in Birmingham was told. 'They then made a contact with their branch on a number of occasions between Sept 9 2023 and Oct 28 2023. 'On none of these occasions did they mention that they were abroad and it was only after they returned to the UK that they disclosed that they had travelled to Bulgaria towards the end of August 2023.' The couple submitted a claim based on Ms Dimitrova's nationality, which was struck out as it had 'no reasonable prospects of success', according to Naeema Choudry, the employment judge on the case. The judge went on to state that she was 'satisfied that the allegation relating to 'tanned skin' had no reasonable prospects of success' and struck that claim out as well. Ms Dimitrova's other claim, relating to the right to be accompanied at a disciplinary meeting, has yet to be heard by a tribunal, and is reported to be scheduled for a later date.
The Sun
2 days ago
- Business
- The Sun
Couple sue supermarket for race discrimination after being sacked for coming back from unauthorised holiday with a tan
A COUPLE have sued Waitrose after being sacked for returning from an unauthorised holiday with a tan. Peter Hedger and Katerina Dimitrova claim that they have been victims of racial discrimination by the store because of their 'tanned skin'. 3 The couple say they were fired from the supermarket after they returned home from a holiday to Bulgaria. A tribunal found that the pair had extended their stay in Bulgaria, Katerina's home country. However, Katerina and Peter have alleged that they were singled out after returning home with 'tanned skin'. A tribunal, held in Birmingham, heard that the couple did not tell Waitrose that they were abroad. The tribunal heard: "The [couple] put in a leave request for 2 September 2023 which was refused. "They, then, made a contact with their branch on a number of occasions between 9 September 2023 and 28 October 2023. "On none of these occasions did they mention that they were abroad and it was only after they returned to the UK that they disclosed that they had travelled to Bulgaria towards the end of August 2023.' The tribunal was also told that John Lewis, Waitrose's owner, said Katerina and Peter had been dismissed for gross misconduct in the form of unauthorised absence. The department store said that an appeal officer concluded that the pair had not been 'open and honest with their branch about the reasons for absence' or even that they were going to Bulgaria. A letter on the outcome of their appeal claimed: "I suspect you went to Bulgaria during your authorised leave and decided to stay longer." Shopper reveals the 'best time' to hit Waitrose for yellow sticker bargains, as she bags strawberries and milk for 69p Peter told the tribunal that the situation had come about because the pair had nowhere to live and that the couple now were struggling to find somewhere to live. Employment Judge Naeema Choudry said that the Katerina and Peter's claims about their 'tanned skin' had no bearing on their dismissal. Ms Naeema Choudry said: "The reason for dismissal was not due to the [couple] being in Bulgaria but because they were believed to be absent from work for no good reason and not to be house-hunting in the UK because they were abroad at the relevant time, having stayed abroad after a period of authorised annual leave. "As such, a claim based on Ms Dimitrova's Bulgarian nationality has no reasonable prospects of success and is struck out. "I am also satisfied that the allegation relating to 'tanned skin' has no reasonable prospects of success and should be struck out. "It is clear that the [couple] were dismissed because they were perceived to be on holiday when they were supposed to be at work and not because they had tanned skin." Both of their claims for unfair dismissal have also been struck out. John Lewis have declined to comment on the situation, saying they "can't comment on individual cases".
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Couple sue Waitrose for race discrimination after they were sacked when they came back from an unauthorised holiday with a tan
A couple sued Waitrose for race discrimination after they came back from an illicit holiday with a tan. Peter Hedger and Katerina Dimitrova were sacked from the supermarket for going on an unauthorised trip abroad, an employment tribunal heard. They sued the upmarket retail giant, claiming that they were discriminated against because of their 'tanned skin'. However, the tribunal found that they were sacked for going on holiday to Miss Dimitrova's home country of Bulgaria, and extending their stay without permission. The tribunal, held virtually in Birmingham, heard that the couple worked at Waitrose, which is owned by John Lewis. It was told: 'The (couple) put in a leave request for 2 September 2023 which was refused. 'They then made a contact with their branch on a number of occasions between 9 September 2023 and 28 October 2023. 'On none of these occasions did they mention that they were abroad and it was only after they returned to the UK that they disclosed that they had travelled to Bulgaria towards the end of August 2023.' The tribunal was told the retailer's position was that the couple 'had been dismissed for gross misconduct namely, unauthorised absence'. It added: 'On appeal the appeal officer had concluded that the evidence showed that the (couple) had not been open and honest with their branch about the reasons for absence, had not let their managers know of the absence at the soonest opportunity and had not informed their managers that they would be in Bulgaria. 'Unauthorised absence was listed as an example of gross misconduct (in John Lewis)'s handbook.' It appeared that the couple had claimed to be house hunting in the UK, when in fact they had extended their stay in Bulgaria. A letter on the outcome of their appeal said: 'I suspect you went to Bulgaria during your authorised leave and decided to stay longer.' Mr Hedger told the tribunal that the situation had come about because neither he nor Miss Dimitrova had anywhere to live. He added that 'neither he nor Ms Dimitrova had worked since their dismissal as it was difficult for them to get work on the same shift, their financial means were not good and they had no income'. Employment Judge Naeema Choudry said: 'The reason for dismissal was not due to the (couple) being in Bulgaria but because they were believed to be absent from work for no good reason and not to be house-hunting in the UK because they were abroad at the relevant time, having stayed abroad after a period of authorised annual leave. 'As such, a claim based on Ms Dimitrova's Bulgarian nationality has no reasonable prospects of success and is struck out. 'I am also satisfied that the allegation relating to "tanned skin" has no reasonable prospects of success and should be struck out. 'It is clear that the (couple) were dismissed because they were perceived to be on holiday when they were supposed to be at work and not because they had tanned skin.' Their claims for discrimination and harassment on the grounds of race were struck out because 'they have no reasonable prospect of success'. Both of their claims for unfair dismissal have also been struck out.
