Calling a female colleague a 'pretty woman' at work is sex discrimination, a tribunal has ruled.

Suggesting that a women's looks might help the business is not 'flattering' and risks 'diminishing' her as it wouldn't be said to a man, an employment judge found.

The ruling came in the case of an accounts manager who sued her employers after her boss told her to attend a meeting - because a male client liked 'pretty women'.

Emma Nunn said she was left feeling 'humiliated and undermined' when Adam Crouch extended the invitation purely for her physical appearance, the employment tribunal heard.

He then 'demeaned' her further by telling her to 'calm down' when she refused, before signing off his message with 'babes', it concluded.

Miss Nunn resigned from her £60,000 a year job and is now in line to receive compensation after winning her claim of sex discrimination with the judge ruled the comments were 'reducing her value to the business' and wouldn't have been made to a male colleague.

Calling a female colleague a 'pretty woman' at work is sex discrimination, a tribunal has ruled (Stock photo) 

The Leicester tribunal heard Mr Crouch took over trucking firm G. & M.J. Crouch & Son, in the city, from his father in 2015, but Miss Nunn had known him as a longstanding family friend since she was 18.

She had worked part time within the vehicle recovery services business before agreeing on a permanent role on in February 2020.

Miss Nunn told the panel their particular friendship led to a 'blurring of the nature of their working relationship'.

'Mr Crouch did not speak, consult with, or treat any another female employee like he spoke and treated me,' she said.

'The 20 year friendship came with significant consequences - I tolerated his behaviour as best I could.

'He was not speaking to me like a boss more like a husband disappointed in a wife (me).

'At one level I was a trust confidante, someone to let off steam to, to disclose inner most secrets and feelings to and next I was a normal employee.'

However, the tribunal found this dynamic of not being 'a purely professional working relationship', was actually 'encouraged' by both of them.

In April 2021, Mr Crouch - who is married - sent her a message about an upcoming meeting saying: 'oh yeah you should come as [a customer] is attending - he likes pretty women.'

When she queried this, replying 'I am not coming if just for pretty face', he told her to 'calm down' and signed off with 'ok babes xx'.

In a subsequent email to Mr Crouch complaining about her treatment, she asked: 'Is that all I get recognised for that I am attractive?'

She resigned later that month, saying she felt 'humiliated and undermined' and took the firm to the tribunal, making a series of claims of sex discrimination and harassment.

While most were dismissed, the 'pretty woman' complaint was upheld.

Employment Judge Rachel Broughton said: [We] find that the 'pretty face' comment would not have been said to a man, or an equivalent comment made about a male colleague's physical attractiveness as a reason for being invited to a work meeting.

'It should have been obvious to him that such a comment would be unwelcome.

'It was not flattering [Miss Nunn], it was reducing her value to the business in that context, and what she would contribute to the meeting.

'The Tribunal conclude that the reference to 'pretty' is sexual in nature. It is about her physical attractiveness and in this context, her physical attractiveness to the opposite sex, a customer.

'The implication is that [the customer] finds her sexually attractive and would for that reason get some pleasure at looking at her in the meeting and/or interacting with her.

'The comment was sexual in nature and was said because of her sex, that she is a woman.'

EJ Broughton concluded that by referring to her as 'babes' in his response, he had 'demeaned her further'.

'Babes' in this context was not affectionate, it was making fun of her reaction and the impact his first comment had,' she continued.

'She felt she was being diminished in terms of her importance to the business and her concerns were being dealt with flippantly, [we] conclude that in this context she was genuinely and reasonably, aggrieved at both not being invited and being told that she should come not because of her work but because the male client considered her attractive.'

The judge concluded 'pretty women' and 'babes' were used 'because of [Miss Nunn]'s sex'.

'Mr Crouch would not have dismissed her concerns in the way he did, but for her sex,' she added.

'He was flippant because of the relationship they had but he used those specific terms because of her sex.

'She was upset and felt diminished professionally by his comments and the tribunal consider that it was reasonable for her to feel that way.'

A further hearing to award compensation will take place at a later date.

like: 862dislike: 64711