A food factory worker sued for race discrimination after he was served a smaller dollop of mayonnaise than his colleagues – but his case was thrown out.
Chibogu Eze brought the case after he was given a small sachet of Hellman’s mayonnaise because the larger tub ran out while employed by food producer Pilgrim’s Pride at their Linton site near Cambridge.
After Mr Eze argued with canteen manager Dorina Rosu over portion sizes and said he was going to complain about her conduct, his employer contacted his recruitment agency and he was asked to leave the job.
He claimed he was given a smaller portion because he was black, suing for race discrimination, harassment and victimisation.
However, after a three-day evaluation the panel found that he had not been discriminated against.
Chibogu Eze claimed he was discriminated against through mayonnaise while working at Pilgrim’s Pride in Linton, Cambridge
Mr Eze was given a smaller sachet of Hellman’s mayonnaise after the larger tub ran out, meaning he got less than his colleagues, an employment tribunal in Bury St Edmunds heard.
Despite the Hellman’s sachet being ‘higher quality’ than the usual brand from the tub, Mr Eze claimed he was being discriminated against because he is black.
He also complained he had been served less salad than his colleagues, and argued with canteen manager Dorina Rosu over the price of a bacon and sausage roll, the tribunal heard.
But all of his claims – including ‘The Mayonnaise Incident’ – were dismissed following the three-day legal process after the panel ruled he had not been discriminated against.
The tribunal heard Mr Eze started working for Staffline Recruitment as a temporary worker in 2018, and was assigned to work at food producer Pilgrim’s Pride at their Linton site near Cambridge.
Mr Eze, who lives in Ipswich, was assigned to the sauce and spice room in September that year, the tribunal heard.
On one occasion, during a lunch break at the factory, burgers were on the menu for the 200 staff and the workers were queuing up to be served, the panel was told.
The tribunal said: ‘Where mayonnaise is part of the dish being served – for example as a sauce within a burger or sandwich – there is a large tub of mayonnaise which is added to the dish by the servers.
‘Where it is not part of the dish – for example as a condiment to be added to fries – the canteen sells branded sachets for 10p per sachet.
‘(Mr Eze) could not recall the brand but accepted that the sachets were branded. We accept (the company’s) evidence that these were of a higher quality than the mayonnaise in the tub.
‘On one occasion, hamburgers were being served for lunch and mayonnaise from the tub was accordingly added to the burger by canteen staff when they were served.
‘Someone in front of (Mr Eze) was served mayonnaise from the tub but (he) was offered a sachet instead.
‘He stated in his witness statement that the tub ‘appeared to him to still contain mayonnaise’ which the Tribunal takes to mean that this is what he thought, but he could not be sure about this.
Eze was given a mayonnaise sachet after the big tub ran out, meaning he got a smaller portion than his colleagues (file image)
‘In any event, we accept the evidence of Ms Rosu that that tub was empty and a new one was not ready. We also accept her evidence that when the new tub came out, (he) asked for mayonnaise from the tub.’
The worker also claimed he had been served half as much salad as his colleagues, but the tribunal heard that even if he had been served ‘less than a full spoonful’, it was not done deliberately.
On another occasion, Mr Eze argued with canteen manager Ms Rosu about the price of his £2.05 bacon and sausage roll.
But the tribunal heard Ms Rosu was clear and consistent about the detail of this, whereas Mr Eze was not able to say anything about the correct price.
Mr Eze also alleged some colleagues had made derogatory racial comments about him, but he was not able to say who or when they happened, the tribunal heard.
And Mr Eze once argued with Ms Rosu while she was giving him and another colleague a lift.
Unhappy about being made to sit in the back of her three door Mini, Mr Eze said he was going to complain about her conduct in the canteen, the tribunal heard.
After the incident was reported, a manager from Pilgrim’s Pride contacted his recruitment agency and he was asked to leave.
Mr Eze sued for race discrimination, harassment and victimisation. However his claims were thrown out.
Dismissing the mayonnaise claim, the panel said: ‘Mr Eze was offered higher quality mayonnaise in a sachet rather than mayonnaise from the tub because the latter had run out.
‘As set out above, the Claimant was offered higher quality mayonnaise in a sachet rather than mayonnaise from the tub because the latter had run out.’
Regarding the salad complaint, the tribunal said: ‘Salad was served by the spoonful and therefore serving sizes were variable. Variable portion sizes were an issue for many people given this inconsistency.
‘If (Mr Eze) was served less that what he perceived was a full spoonful it was for this reason and not deliberate.
‘On a particular occasion, (Mr Eze) asked for more salad and (he) was told that he would have to pay for a second spoonful.
‘In the circumstances, we find that he was not treated less favourably than others who did not share his race would be treated or that the less favourable treatment was because of his race.’
The tribunal also found that Ms Rosu had not made offensive remarks to Mr Eze.
***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk