Did NHS worker Lorna Rooke really win that sum after being compared to Darth Vader, thereby suffering workplace detriment, as a newspaper headline reported? Not quite. Only £12,000 of the award was attributed to injury to feelings. Most of the remainder was for financial losses arising from detriment attributed to protected disclosures, specifically refusal to let her rescind her resignation. Even so, £12,000 when the villain is a fictional entertainment character rather than a brutal dictator? Time for a closer look.
The claimant in Rooke v NHS Blood & Transplant participated in a team personality test with a Star Wars theme. A colleague finished off Ms Rooke’s part completed test when she had to leave the room. The verdict, based upon the answers: a very focused individual who brings the team together. The verdict’s category: Darth Vader. Perhaps best not to think of R2-D2 or Chewbacca categories.
This took place in August 2021. Ms Rooke said it was the last in a series of detriments, linked to disability comprising anxiety and low mood disorder. Having resigned with effect from 17 October 2021, Ms Rooke’s claims for unfair constructive dismissal, direct disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments all failed. In relation to the first, the tribunal found that “the Darth Vader incident was not an operative one on the claimant’s decision to resign”.
In that case, what led to her detriment claim succeeding? One of Ms Rooke’s disclosures, about information obtained from blood donors, was deemed protected. However, in its own right, this protected disclosure had no link with the Star Wars villain. What tipped the balance?
There were two reasons. The NHS Trust’s account of a supposed recruitment freeze following the resignation lacked all credibility, in the context of refusing Ms Rooke’s request to rescind it. The refusal was evidently only attributable to the Trust’s hostile attitude towards Ms Rooke’s protected disclosure.
As to the “insult” of being aligned with Mr Vader’s personality, it was noted that Ms Rooke’s manager Ms Harber – to whom the protected disclosure was made – was responsible for finishing off Ms Rooke’s test questionnaire, leading to Darth’s verdict. “It therefore reflected Ms Harber’s perception of the Claimant’s personality.” But did it? Could she have known that those answers would produce that result, rather than Princess Leia or Obi Wan-Kenobi?
Back to the award. More than half of it comprised actual financial losses arising from the resignation being made to stand. As such, the £12,000 injured feelings award may only have been partly attributable to Ms Rooke’s professed shock and dismay upon hearing the outcome of a team building test founded upon pure chance. So much for newspaper headlines.
No one reading about this case will ever know if steps were taken in the hope of settling it, or if both parties stood firm. A dispute over workplace attitudes is likely to be difficult to predict. This is where an independent legal assessment can save time and money. If you have one of your own in need of attention before it goes too far, get in touch. Contact David Cooper on 0121 325 5402 or via dmc@coxcooper.co.uk .
Share this post: