‘Sloppy work’: University of Manchester staff member wins tribunal over misgendering claim

Karenne Sylvester argued that the university had discriminated against her on the basis of disability


A University of Manchester employee who was accused of harassment for misgendering a transgender colleague has won an employment tribunal case against the institution.

Karenne Sylvester was found by university investigators to have repeatedly used incorrect pronouns when referring to a colleague, an action the tribunal heard caused the colleague distress. As a result, Ms Sylvester was moved to a different team, a decision she said damaged her career prospects.

At an employment tribunal in Manchester, Ms Sylvester argued that the university had discriminated against her on the basis of disability. She told the tribunal that her short term memory difficulties, linked to dyspraxia, affected her ability to consistently remember the correct pronouns for a colleague who had transitioned from female to male.

via Canva

Ms Sylvester, who had worked as a learning technologist at the university since 2018 and was diagnosed with dyspraxia in 2011, said managers failed to properly consider the impact of her condition during the investigation.

The tribunal agreed, ruling that those handling the harassment complaint had “ignored” the likelihood that her disability contributed to the misgendering. Ms Sylvester will receive compensation, with the amount to be decided at a later date.

Dyspraxia, while commonly linked to difficulties with physical coordination, can involve wider and more complex challenges, the tribunal heard. It was described as a condition that affects how the brain processes and transmits information.

After an incident involving a transgender colleague, identified as CD, Ms Sylvester was instructed not to have “physical interaction with the rest of her team” and was required to book a room when working on campus to ensure she did not encounter CD.

During a meeting about the incident, Ms Sylvester told investigators Stuart Phillipson and Martin Banks that “her dyspraxia made it more difficult for her to gender CD correctly.”

Despite this, Mr Phillipson, an e-learning manager, and Mr Banks, a lead people partner, concluded that she had “persistently used the incorrect pronoun over a period of time.”

The tribunal later criticised the appeal process, finding that the panel had carried out some “sloppy work” and failed to complete some “basic due diligence.”

Zoe Thompson, the employment judge hearing the tribunal, said: “Having weighed all the evidence, we find that, on balance, the reason [Ms Sylvester] had used the incorrect pronoun on this and previous occasions was because of her dyspraxia.
“Her dyspraxia affected her short-term memory, meaning it took longer for her to consistently adopt the correct pronouns compared to a neurotypical person.”
Judge Thompson said the investigators found Ms Sylvester had harassed her colleague because of a situation arising from her disability, and were “personally liable” for her discrimination claims.
She added: “We find that [Mr Phillipson and Mr Banks] were aware that [Ms Sylvester] was raising her dyspraxia as the likely reason why she misgendered CD and they chose to ignore that.
“We find that they did not conduct a fair or impartial investigation and then provided incorrect information to the appeal panel.”
Featured image via Canva