A knitwear designer recently won her case against a clothing retailer, Superdry. The case involved allegations of unfair dismissal and age discrimination. These were substantiated and resulted in a £96,208 payout.
Rachel Sunderland worked for Superdry as a men’s and women’s knitwear designer between 2015 and 2020, before resigning due to various “actions and omissions” against her. The tribunal ruled that the claimant was unfairly dismissed based on a fundamental breach of her contract of employment.
In a five-day trial in Bristol that began on March 21, 2022, Sunderland claimed that Superdry “failed to promote her or give her the job title of lead designer — culminating in her appraisal in November 2019” during her time at the company.
Rachel was also under an additional workload in the summer of 2019 as her colleague went on maternity leave. This was also followed by the “implicit incentive” of promotion, which was then denied afterwards.
Rachel Sunderland was informed that she did not have adequate management experience managing other employees to be promoted. Rachel also pointed out several cases in which young employees were elevated to lead design positions despite not having supervisory or managerial obligations, implying that the company may rely on a more traditional workforce formed by those younger than Rachel. In one of the cases, a designer with almost twenty years lesser experience than Sunderland was also promoted.
In another situation, a colleague of Sunderland’s referred to her as “scatty.” The term was deemed “loaded with subjectivity” by the tribunal and one that “verges on an abusive word and would not be used to describe a younger, male coworker.”
The trial declared that Sunderland’s unfair dismissal claims were on a fairground. Being 56 years old, Sunderland was also discriminated on her age by Superdry.
Tribunal claimed that Sunderland possessed all the qualities required for promotion to the lead designer position. It further added that there was no satisfactory justification given to Sunderland for her not being promoted in the company. There was no such type of explanation that might have led her to believe that she lacked anything to get promoted.
Some additional findings declared that Superdry didn’t consider the effects of high work pressure on Sunderland’s physical and mental health.
Aside from providing her with what can only have been interpreted as a hint that handling this workload might help her in her quest for promotion and the assistance of a coworker who was frequently not available to assist, the respondent disregarded all other options.
The tribunal further determined that the claimant’s age was the reason behind Superdry’s actions. As a result, a reward of £96,208 was given to Sunderland.
According to Superdry’s spokesperson, Superdry aims to provide equality in the workplace for all its employees. They added that the tribunal’s judgment is unfair and doesn’t reflect the company’s culture and values. Still, they thanked the tribunal for thoroughly reviewing the case and claiming to respect its decision and findings.
If you would like to have an informal chat with our Employment Discrimination experts in confidence to see if you have a viable claim then please complete the contact form on our website and we will give you a call back at a time convenient to you or please call/ contact Iwona Durlak, Employment Discrimination Partner and Solicitor by contacting us on 0330 107 0107 or email info@imd.co.uk. Once we are contacted by you, one of our helpful team members will contact you. Please note we have a team of lawyers who speak many languages including English, Polish, Romanian, Russian and Lithuanian.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. Please note that the law may have changed since this article was published.
Talk to us today 
CONTACT US TODAY
0330 107 0107