Graduate, 21, demoted for being ‘too young’
Kitchen company’s £3,000 bill over age discrimination
A UNIVERSITY graduate won £3,000 compensation after she was discriminated against by work bosses who said she was ‘only 21’.
Brooke Shanks was demoted by managers at a kitchen showroom because the job ‘was too much responsibility’ for someone her age.
Miss Shanks, now 22, who trained in interior design at university, was told her superiors wanted somebody older to work as a supervisor.
An employment tribunal ruled she was the victim of age discrimination and awarded her £2,002.50 for the breach of contract. She was awarded another £1,000 for her hurt feelings.
Miss Shanks said she was ‘disappointed’ that she received only a third of the payout before the company went into liquidation.
She has been forced to change careers due to the experience and is now studying a postgraduate course in event management. She said: ‘I thought I had been doing a good job. I was insulted and shocked. It made me feel very demotivated.’
Miss Shanks took action on the advice of her mother Fiona, a human resources worker.
Claims for age discrimination usually relate to employees who are older and are much less common among those in their 20s.
The tribunal in Glasgow heard that Miss Shanks was appointed as a kitchen design technician responsible for running Heat Source Solutions Ltd’s Clerwood Kitchens and Bathrooms showroom in West Lothian, Scotland, in February 2018.
But she was treated ‘less favourably’ because of her age and was not offered feedback before an attempt by managers to demote her. She then resigned two months after bosses said she would be replaced.
Employment judge Rory McPherson said: ‘In early December 2018, the claimant’s line manager advised
‘I felt insulted and shocked’
that the respondents were recruiting a showroom supervisor to be based at the Clerwood showroom to operate a bridge between the claimant and the respondent.
‘That person would take on managerial roles in respect of the showroom. The reason, given to the claimant for this change, was that the claimant was “only 21” and the job “was too much responsibility” for someone of the claimant’s age.
‘The claimant was upset by this statement, which the claimant regarded as being age discriminatory.
‘Having reflected on the statement and the delays in payment being made the claimant felt that she had no option than to look for alternate job opportunities.’
The tribunal heard Miss Shanks was not given a written contract, was not enrolled into a pension scheme and was not given any wage slips during her year-long stint with the company.
Bosses also failed on five occasions to pay her wages on time and did not offer three days’ holiday pay to which she was entitled.