Muslim Cafe Worker Racially Discriminated and Dismissed For Demanding Fair Pay

In Miss Ayshea Malik v Mr Przemyslaw Paliga and Others, a Muslim cafe worker won her religious and race discrimination at the work claims, along with her claim for unfair dismissal. The tribunal sided with the mother of two, who was sacked after asking about future work shifts, despite her white British colleague raising similar questions and keeping their job.

Read on as we examine the case facts and outline the employment tribunal’s judgment. We discuss how race discrimination in employment may arise and what those affected could do.

If you have experienced race discrimination in the UK and want specialist employment law help, contact Redmans Solicitors now. As experts in the sector, we can assess your circumstances and advise on how you could proceed.

To learn more about the help we provide, simply:

The Facts in Miss Ayshea Malik v Mr Przemyslaw Paliga and Others

Background to Race Discrimination at Workplace Claim

Miss Ayshea Malik (“The Claimant”), who describes herself as a Pakistani Muslim, began working as a catering assistant for Food 4 Thought café on 20 November 2013. Ms Debbie Dicken ran the business until it was sold to Mr Przemyslaw Paliga and Mr Zbigniew Szary (“The Respondents”) in early 2023.

Before the respondent’s takeover, Ms Dicken reassured the Muslim cafe worker that her employment would be unaffected; and initially, this appeared to be the case. During the first four weeks of March, the claimant worked her regular hours. While she was underpaid £234 during this period, she was told this was a tax issue that would be rectified.

However, as April commenced, the claimant was provided with a new contract of employment that the respondents wanted her to sign. Before she did, though, she took it home and read it over. When she came to analyse the document, she realised her employment had been amended to that of a casual worker on a zero-hours contract. This differed from her previous working arrangement with Ms Dicken, so she refused to sign.

Muslim Cafe Worker Removed From Rota

Early in April, the claimant requested annual leave on 21 April to observe the religious festival of Eid. Despite this, she continued to work her regular shifts until the requested date and began receiving her correct weekly wage that month.

On her day off, though, the claimant thought about the underpayments she’d received in her March wages. Consequently, she messaged the work WhatsApp group, stating that she still hadn’t received the March shortfall and was unsure who to discuss this with.

Soon after, one of the respondents, Mr Szary, messaged the group chat with a screenshot of the following week’s rota. When the claimant looked at her shifts, she realised she hadn’t been given any. As such, she messaged the respondents to query her lack of shifts.

Unfortunately, when the Muslim cafe worker received a reply, the respondents simply stated, “That’s what Jan and I decided about the hours for the next week.” Dissatisfied with this response, the claimant pushed for a better explanation and again queried her March wages.

Food 4 Thought Café Dismisses Claimant

On 23 April, two days after the claimant’s initial WhatsApp query, she received a private message from one of the respondents, Mr Paliga. In his message, he said, “Dear Ayshea, in connection with your resignation from further cooperation with Food 4 Thought… I would like to inform you that you will receive documents confirming the official termination…” Immediately after receipt, she was also removed from the work WhatsApp group chat.

Understandably, this came as quite a shock to the Muslim cafe worker. She messaged Mr Szary, stating that she hadn’t resigned, questioned if she still had a job and wanted an explanation. Unfortunately, she didn’t get one and instead received a message on 28 April confirming her resignation/dismissal five days earlier. This message also stated that if she disputed the decision by Food 4 Thought café, she could take legal action.

Racism Claims Brought by Muslim Cafe Worker

Over the following weeks, the claimant repeatedly sought an explanation for her termination. However, each time she received a response, she was told that dismissal documents with the answer would be provided soon.

With no answers in sight, the claimant turned to ACAS and commenced early conciliation on 3 May and 11 July. Once this was complete, she initiated employment tribunal proceedings on 12 July and 12 August.

The claimant believed racism had influenced the treatment she’d endured. She felt that a white British non-muslim wouldn’t have faced similar actions and brought claims of race discrimination and religion or belief discrimination. Among other things, she also claimed unfair dismissal and failure to provide written reasons for dismissal.

The Employment Tribunal’s Judgment

Following proceedings, the employment tribunal began by considering the unfair dismissal claim. They concluded the claimant’s dismissal primarily came about after she exercised her statutory right to avoid unauthorised wage deductions. Consequently, they held her dismissal was automatically unfair.

However, while the dismissal may have been automatically unfair, the tribunal also believed race and religion had played a part. Despite both the Muslim cafe worker and her colleague raising issues with their pay and lack of shifts, only the claimant was dismissed.

Although the claimant was Pakistani and Muslim, her colleague was white British and not Muslim. Therefore, the dismissal was less favourable treatment, and the respondent had no non-discriminatory reason for the treatment. As a result, the tribunal upheld religion and race discrimination in employment claims.

Following the claimant’s successful ruling, a remedy hearing will be scheduled to determine her compensation.

Understanding Racism at Work: Direct and Indirect Race Discrimination

Racism at work can arise in various ways and could appear as either direct or indirect discrimination. Direct race discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably, directly because of their race— for example, if an individual is sacked simply because they are black.

Indirect race discrimination arises when an employer treats everyone the same, which in turn puts someone else of a particular race at a disadvantage. In practice, this may occur if a company implements a policy requiring all employees to have English as their first language to be eligible for a job. While this policy applies to everyone, it indirectly discriminates against individuals whose native language is not English. Unless the employer has an objectively justifiable reason to explain this decision, the policy would be unlawful.

If, like the Muslim cafe worker, an individual believes they’ve experienced some form of workplace race discrimination, they should first raise it with their employer. Depending on the severity of the incident, this may involve having an informal chat or raising a grievance. Either way, if an internal remedy can be found, stressful court action can be avoided.

How to Make a Race Discrimination Claim: Next Steps and Legal Support

Should an individual be unable to solve their problem internally, they may need to seek external help. ACAS early conciliation is a good place to start, but legal action may be required if this doesn’t work. To proceed with a claim, the individual would need to adhere to specific time limits and eligibility criteria.

We hope you found this insight into the case involving the Muslim cafe worker insightful. If you have any questions or want help with your own employment tribunal claim, please don’t hesitate to reach out. Redmans Solicitors are employment law specialists who can provide tailored, expert advice following a quick chat.

To begin,