KFC Franchisee Employee Wins Direct Race Discrimination Claim After Facing “Slave” Comment

In Mr Madhesh Ravichandran v Nexus Foods Limited, a KFC franchisee employee has been awarded nearly £70,000 after it was found that he faced direct race discrimination when he was referred to as a “slave.”

In our latest article, we examine what happened and discuss the employment tribunal’s judgment. We then establish how race discrimination may manifest in the workplace and the steps individuals can take if they face such unfavourable treatment.

If you believe you’ve faced discrimination at work, contact Redmans Solicitors now. As employment experts, our team can analyse your case, answer your questions, and provide specialist advice. We can also assess your claim’s eligibility and guide eligible individuals through each stage of the legal process.

To find out more about how we can help you, simply:

• Phone us on 020 3397 3603
• Request a callback via our online form

The Facts in Mr Madhesh Ravichandran v Nexus Foods Limited

Background to the Direct Race Discrimination Claim

Mr Madhesh Ravichandran (“the Claimant”) began working as a team member for Nexus Foods Limited (“the Respondent”) on 13 January 2023. The Claimant is from India and is a native Tamil speaker. Meanwhile, the Respondent is a KFC franchisee, at which the Claimant worked at its West Wickham outlet.

On 14 January, the day after he commenced employment, the Claimant was asked to sign an employment contract. However, he wasn’t given time to review the document or a signed copy afterwards. This meant he didn’t understand his employment or contractual rights at this stage.

Claimant Referred to as a “Slave”

A few months later, on 23 March, the Claimant verbally requested a period of annual leave. This request was made to Mr Kajan Theiventhiram, referred to during the proceedings as “Kajan,” the restaurant manager at the West Wickham outlet. Unfortunately, this request was refused.

Read More: Racial Discrimination Soars Among Nurses: Findings from the RCN and What the Law Says

Notably, the Claimant alleged to have overheard Kajan later that day, something which proved integral to his subsequent claim. According to the Claimant, Kajan said to a colleague that he would prioritise leave requests from Sri Lankan Tamils. For reference, Kajan is Sri Lankan and a native Tamil speaker, as were many other workers in the restaurant. Kajan was also alleged to have referred to the Claimant as “this sh*t” and a “slave.”

Excessive Hours Lead to Resignation

From February until July, the Claimant was forced to work excessive hours. His contract provided a limit of 45 hours per week, but he was consistently given more, working an average of 75 hours per week during one period.

The Claimant then reached his limit in the last week of July, when he was scheduled to work more than 89 hours. He refused, and on 31 July, he submitted his resignation, citing the 45-hour contractual limit, after a colleague informed him of his rights. He intended to end his employment with the Respondent on 14 August, after providing two weeks’ notice.

However, on 1 August and outside of working hours, Kajan called the Claimant. He sought to persuade the Claimant to amend his reason for resignation to “personal reasons,” rather than issues with him. Unfortunately, during this call, Kajan was “racially abusive and threatening” towards the Claimant.

Issues then persisted at work, with the Claimant being assigned kitchen duties on Kajan’s instruction on 2 and 5 August. Having not been assigned such duties on the rota, the Claimant refused to complete them and never returned to work after the latter date.

Direct Race Discrimination Claim Brought

After leaving work on 5 August, the Claimant emailed various senior figures within the Respondent, including Mr John Smith, the area coach. He complained of Kajan’s conduct, referencing the “slave” comment, and asked for a “comprehensive and transparent investigation.”

Yet, when Mr Smith responded two days later, his response was described as “terse, bordering on hostile.” He dismissed many of the Claimant’s allegations and threatened possible disciplinary action. And even when a subsequent grievance meeting took place, the tribunal later found this process deeply flawed.

On 29 September, the Claimant raised a second grievance, but after no appropriate action was taken, he decided to pursue employment tribunal proceedings. This resulted in his case being presented to the tribunal on 13 December, comprising claims including direct race discrimination and automatic unfair dismissal.

The Employment Tribunal’s Judgment

Following the proceedings, the tribunal looked at the Claimant’s case. With regard to his claim of direct race discrimination, it explained how the Claimant was subjected to unfavourable treatment when his holiday request was refused, and he was referred to as a “slave.” Since both incidents arose due to him being Indian, this claim was therefore upheld.

The tribunal then turned to the claim of harassment related to race. It similarly ruled that Kajan’s conduct, which again arose due to the Claimant being Indian, had the purpose or effect of violating the Claimant’s dignity or creating an offensive and humiliating environment for him. As such, this claim was also upheld.

Moving on, the tribunal assessed the various elements of the Claimant’s victimisation claim. One such element concerned the manner in which Mr Smith responded to his grievance. Since the Claimant had done a protected act, in that he’d complained about discrimination, and was met with the threat of disciplinary action, this claim succeeded, too.

Yet, while his wrongful dismissal, holiday pay, and failure to provide written particulars of employment claims were all upheld, his unfair dismissal and all other victimisation claims were dismissed.

Despite this, having succeeded with the majority of his claims, the Claimant was awarded £66,760.71 in compensation. Among other things, his award comprised injury to feelings and financial losses.

What is an Example of Race Discrimination?

Race discrimination occurs when an individual is treated less favourably because of their race, nationality, or ethnic or national origins. Under the Equality Act 2010, this can include direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, harassment, and victimisation.

A clear example of direct race discrimination is where a worker is subjected to derogatory or demeaning language because of their race. In the above case, the tribunal accepted that referring to the Claimant as a “slave” was intrinsically linked to his race and national origin, and therefore constituted unlawful discrimination. The refusal of his holiday request, when contrasted with the preferential treatment allegedly afforded to workers of a different nationality or ethnic background, further demonstrated less favourable treatment because of race.

Read More: Zero-Hours Contracts: Employee Rights, Examples & Benefits in the UK

However, race discrimination may also manifest in other ways, such as:

• Singling out employees of a particular race for unfavourable shifts, excessive hours, or less desirable duties
• Applying workplace policies or practices in a way that disproportionately disadvantages workers of a certain race
• Making racist remarks, jokes, or comments, or tolerating a workplace culture in which such behaviour goes unchallenged
• Treating an employee unfairly after they raise concerns about race discrimination, which may amount to victimisation

Faced Direct Race Discrimination: Here’s What You Can Do

If an individual believes they’ve faced direct race discrimination, there are several steps they can take to seek justice. Before deciding how to proceed, though, it’s wise to gather evidence of what happened. In doing so, the individual can strengthen their case, whether or not it reaches a tribunal.

Once evidence has been gathered, the individual should consider internal measures. Having an informal chat with HR or raising a formal grievance in line with the employer’s policy can help resolve the matter swiftly and avoid further action.

If neither of these works, though, the next step is usually to initiate Acas early conciliation. This free and independent process is usually required before most claims can be brought, and offers another chance to resolve the matter informally.

However, as a last resort, an employment tribunal claim could be brought. Strict eligibility criteria and time limits must be met to proceed. If the individual succeeds with their claim, they could be awarded compensation.

Get Help with Redmans

If you’ve experienced direct race discrimination at work and want expert legal help, contact us. Redmans Solicitors are specialists in the employment sector, and following a brief chat, we can discuss your possible options.

It only takes a moment to get started with us today, simply:

• Call us on 020 3397 3603
• Complete our online form to request a consultation