Leaders of the recruitment firm Maximus dismissed Elizabeth Benassi in October 2022, after she raised a grievance about being “micromanaged” and “treated like a baby”. Benassi's employer cited her performance and a breach of the dress code as reasons for her dismissal.
The tribunal ruled that bosses at the company had a “desire to find fault” with her. Benassi was awarded £29,000 in compensation for victimisation. Her claims of age harassment were discarded.
“Sadly, the Elizabeth Benassi tribunal draws attention to how easily companies can falter when they fail to create a truly inclusive environment,” said Nahla Khaddage Bou-Diab, AM Bank's CEO, speaking to HR magazine.
“Benassi's experience reflects a workplace culture where youth was perceived as a liability rather than a strength.
“Employers must recognise that unless they consciously value young talent, they risk alienating the very people who can bring fresh, innovative thinking and miss out on creating a company culture that embraces fledgling talent.”
Read more: Coughing in employee's face was harassment, tribunal finds
Benassi joined Maximus in August 2022. The tribunal heard that Benassi’s colleagues were mostly “a young group of employees” in their early 20s; Benassi was the youngest.
In her first few days at the company, Benassi came across a colleague, crying at the train station. That colleague told Benassi that she was leaving, and blamed this on being bullied by her manager, Ishrat Ashraf.
Ashraf called Benassi into a meeting and asked her what her colleague had said. Benassi mentioned the meeting in a later grievance she raised about Ashraf. This arose when Ashraf revealed Benassi's age to her colleagues after Benassi had asked her not to. Benassi was concerned that her colleagues would treat her as the “baby of the group” if they knew she was 18.
On 9 September, the company had a team-building event at a bowling alley. The tribunal heard that Benassi was shocked and disheartened to find out that Ashraf had informed her colleagues her age that night.
She emailed Ashraf the next working day to say that she felt this was a breach of confidentiality and trust, and asked if the two of them could speak about the incident so they could “continue to build a good work rapport and get past” it.
After Benassi raised the issue, she was assigned a new manager, Alva de la Camara.
The next week, Benassi raised a grievance with the HR department as she was concerned that one of her colleagues, Roberta, had been looking at her work laptop without permission.
Benassi detailed the incident in the email, saying that she saw Roberta take pictures of her laptop screen while she was in a meeting.
When Benassi returned to her laptop, she noticed Roberta was talking to Ashraf on her laptop. Ashraf asked Roberta to send a screenshot on ICONI [a case management software].
“It was done in a way to impersonate me and make it look like I was the one chatting with [Ashraf] when I was not on my laptop at the time,” Benassi said, which she claimed was a “serious breach of security”.
“I believe that [Ashraf]’s continuous targeting stems from my age as I do not believe she would do this to me had I been older,” Benassi said in her email.
While HR professionals investigated Benassi’s grievance, she continued her training, shadowing colleagues who sent reports to both Ashraf and de la Camera.
On 26 September, Benassi came to work in trainers. Ashraf spoke to her immediately as this was a breach of the dress code, the tribunal heard, although Benassi was not aware of it.
She apologised, but wrote to Ashraf to say she was not happy with the way she was spoken to. “I apologised for this, and you rolled your eyes,” Benassi said. “I have now realised [I] am not the only one wearing trainers today and I have not seen anyone receive the same chat that I have.”
Ashraf escalated the grievance to the operations manager, who emailed Benassi to say: “I want to see a professional dress code at all times. This is totally unacceptable coming to work in trainers. Please adhere to a professional dress code.”
In the meantime, de la Camera contacted Maximus' HR company for advice about Benassi.
Later that day, two of Benassi’s colleagues emailed Ashraf about an incident in which Benassi asked them if she could go to the toilet in front of a client.
Judge Fowell noted that “it does not seem to us at all remarkable that she should ask such a question”, given that she was being closely monitored, and that the fact that colleagues felt free to email their manager about her in “negative terms” helped to shed “some further light on that environment”.
The tribunal heard that de la Camera and Ashraf continued to call Benassi into discussions about her performance for four consecutive days in a row following her grievance.
Relations between Benassi and her employer worsened, the tribunal noted. In an email to de la Camera, Benassi said she felt as though she could not “breathe at work without it being an issue”.
Benassi later had a panic attack at work while she was in a meeting. She called 111, whose representative advised her to take time off work. However, she did not feel she was able to because she was on probation.
Around a month later, Benassi was invited to a probation review meeting where she was told she would be dismissed.
De la Camera said this was due to her attendance, behaviour, conduct, time keeping during work hours, and her violation of the dress code. He sent notes from the probation meeting to a HR advisor, who raised concerns about his approach and stated that the company should extend her probation.
The tribunal ruled that Benassi had been victimised as a result of wearing trainers to work. She was “immediately and unfairly tackled” about this, the tribunal noted, which “indicates a desire to find a fault” with her.
“[Benassi] was literally being scrutinised from the moment of her arrival,” judge Fowell said, noting that clear “ill-will” towards Benassi at work but that this was no indication this was due to age. Fowell dismissed Benassi’s claims of age harassment.
Benassi was awarded £29,187 for financial loss and injury to feelings.
Read more: Age UK fined £4,000 for age harassment
Victimisation at work happens when “an employee faces negative treatment for intending to bring, or bringing or supporting, a discrimination or harassment complaint”, Tina Chandler, head of employment law at Wright Hassall, told HR magazine.
Employers should ensure that policies are shared with employees during onboarding, she suggested.
Chandler added: “An employee should not be disciplined or dismissed for complaining about discrimination or harassment at work.
“It is interesting to note in this case that Benassi was not aware of her employer’s dress code policy, and other employees had not, as far as she was aware, been sanctioned for breaches of a dress code policy.
“Businesses that have taken the proactive step to implement policies in the workplace should ensure that employees are familiar with their existence and content.”
HR professionals should ensure that young employees feel safe to express their thoughts in the workplace, Bou-Diab added.
She noted: “Organisations must embed age diversity at the heart of their HR policies, focusing on inclusive recruitment, fair performance evaluations, and training to prevent unconscious bias. It’s so important that young employees feel safe to create and express their thoughts.
"In my experience, the most forward-thinking companies foster collaboration between generations, with a 56-year-old person sitting right next to a Gen-Z colleague. This creates a collaborative culture built on mutual respect and understanding, where diversity of thought – across age groups – drives success."
