EasyJet manager who called misogynistic comments ‘banter’ loses appeal against sacking

An Employment Court, inappropriate and a series of complaints about the allegations of interpretation of an enemy of women, a series of complaints were not unjustly rejected.

Ross Barr, a Edinburgh -based manager, was dismissed by the airline after a disciplinary hearing in September last year, but claimed that he was unjustly rejected, that the company could not offer written reasons for fire and was less positive due to sexual orientation.

The allegations against him, a crew member on a flight “looking at his ass”, women’s flight officials on Tannoy “cute ladies” on the court’s decision, according to the court’s decision to refer to “more attractive colleagues” referred to the “more attractive colleagues”.

In August 2022, Mr. Barr filed a complaint about the behavior of female colleagues on a flight, and the disciplinary hearing that resulted in a final written warning.

At the end of 2023, an anonymous complaint by a crew member claimed that Mr. Barr had repeatedly made uncomfortable and sexual or disrespectful comments to passengers, including homophobic and transphobic interpretations in his presence.

A customer complained about the behavior of Mr. Barr during a flight in July last year and told a female member of the cabin team: orum I don’t do anything, I’m just looking at her ass ”.

During a meeting with Edinburgh Base Manager, Mr. Barr said he could not remember the incident: orum I don’t know who this is without knowing who this is.

Bir With some of the crew you are better and joke, the only thing that came to my mind was the front of another flight (a female crew member).

“I wrap my brain and I can’t think of anything.

In an interview, the Mürettebat member confirmed that Mr. Barr commented, but he did not bother him and called him “joke” and “non -headquarters interpretation”.

The same passenger claimed that Mr. Barr was “constantly enemies of women and inappropriate, because they ride on the plane, including women’s flight officials on Tannoy to call“ cute ladies ve and refer to “more attractive colleagues”.

Mr. Barr confessed that he called the female crew members “cute ladies ,, but he said that he called the male crew as“ cute gentlemen ve and said that he referred to his “more attractive colleagues”.

In August last year, after a crew member working with him, a crew member filed another complaint by a crew member: “The whole shift was talking about sex or making jokes about it.

“He explained that someone had previously been suspended because of a conversation (complaint) that someone opposed him, because he said, ‘All I said, his breasts would grow if he was pregnant, and he predicted what they were doing’.”

In addition, while a steep seat belt back, putting back into the bag with very few places, Mr. Barr said to him: “Is there a problem trying to fill this? I bet I have never experienced this problem.”

In an interview about these allegations, Mr. Barr did not accept that his comments were sexual in nature, and he said about the seat belt interpretation: “I can hear me just something ‘, I don’t know… I don’t really remember.”

Another crew member on the flight, said he could not remember anyone sexually commenting.

At a disciplinary meeting, it was decided that Mr. Barr’s behavior was a risk for work and heavy abuse and that his employment would be terminated.

His charm failed to Sacking.

Employment judge Muriel Robison found that the reasoning of the investigation into the behavior of Mr. Barr and that the decision to reject it was based on a “real belief ı that the alleged abuse committed.

The judge said, “It is understood that the plaintiff described as a comparison as a mentor for allegedly treated less positively due to sexual orientation,” he continued.

“He claimed that he had repeated his public announcement style, but the comparison was not condemned. However, this completely misses the point.

“The plaintiff did not produce any evidence that this comparison, who was accused of sexual harassment after a complaint from a customer and/or colleague, or a indeed hypothetical comparison.”

The judge rejected the claim that Mr. Barr did not establish a less favorable treatment due to his sexual orientation, and that Easyjet could not provide written reasons for ignition.