back to article Sacked saleswoman told to pay Intel £45k after losing discrim case

A former senior saleswoman at Intel who accused the firm of sex discrimination and wrongful dismissal has lost all of her claims and has been ordered to pay the company £45,000 (~$63,000) by the middle of this month. Watford Employment Tribunal, in Hertfordshire, England, dismissed all of Mary Guiney's claims and ordered her …

  1. Solarflare

    On the last article about this, i said simply "she sounds like a complete nightmare". For some reason the post was deleted. I feel sort of vindicated now.

    1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

      I feel you are vindicated as well

      It's always difficult to know exactly what happened in such cases. Maybe there actually was some sort of discrimination, but one thing feels certain : she's not being objective about it.

      So he didn't answer her emails. That in itself is not proof of discrimination. After reading this article, I have the distinct feeling that the bias is on her part, given that she barely recognizes attempts to be balanced and immediately follows by the base statement "but I know it isn't because of what I saw", but without bringing any facts to the table.

      In short, she may have been right to feel slighted, but acting like a harpy about it does not make her case.

      I think the judge was right on this.

      1. Hans Neeson-Bumpsadese Silver badge

        Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

        In short, she may have been right to feel slighted, but acting like a harpy about it does not make her case.

        Are you suggesting that she has a chip on her shoulder?

        1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

          1. Natalie Gritpants

            Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

            Dreadful sexist attitude there but having worked in the Intel building in Swindon I can attest that walking from the engineering area on the third floor through the sales/mkt area to get a coffee is like entering another planet.

            1. AMBxx Silver badge

              Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

              I used to work for Vignette. There were lots of ex-Oracle salespeople there. Regardless of what you think of Oracle, they're extremely good at sales traing. Certainly, none of the women needing coaching or mentoring - they were already more than capable of doing what was needed.

              Playing the sexist card was doomed to failure.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Happy

                Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

                She's currently having her own personal Meltdown.

                1. AndrueC Silver badge
                  Joke

                  Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

                  She's currently having her own personal Meltdown.

                  And is now facing the Spectre of a large payout.

        2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
          Coat

          Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

          Are you suggesting that she has a chip on her shoulder?

          Intel outside?

          1. Ol' Grumpy
            Thumb Up

            Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

            "Are you suggesting that she has a chip on her shoulder?"

            It was probably AMD ... :D

        3. David Nash Silver badge
          Joke

          Chip on her shoulder

          I am trying to work out whether that was supposed to be a pun or not!

        4. Flywheel Silver badge

          Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

          More likely her memory's not what it used to be...

      2. LucreLout Silver badge

        Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

        So he didn't answer her emails. That in itself is not proof of discrimination.

        It's not, but having been discriminated against to the point of choosing to resign, I can well understand why her emails may have gone unanswered. My nightmare boss routinely ducked emails because she didn't want to leave a paper trail, and I couldn't prove whatever she said to me in a mtg room as her response.

        There's no paper trail that would show her trying to contructively dismiss me, but the team were in absolutely no doubt that was her game plan. A post employment DPA request was does somewhat back up my assertion, but its far from the smoking gun I would have needed. Rather than subject myself to the misery of HR followed by legal action, I took the easy route and found another job with a better employer. The rest of the team followed suit within 6 weeks.

        I regret letting her get away with it, but the damage it would have done to my career and employment prospects simply weren't worth the battle. In situations like this I always remember the advice my dad gave me on my first day at work - don't ever sue or steal from your employer unless you can guarantee to get so much money you never need to work again, because you'll probably never work again.

        1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge

          Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

          " and I couldn't prove whatever she said to me in a mtg room as her response."

          Which is why I always like to follow up a meeting with a summary of my notes of what was discussed. If they feel that I have misrepresented what they have said they can email a response etc. - but if they try and 'correct' me in another meeting then I simply follow that up with another summary email.

          In looking back at the email trail, that kind of behaviour screams avoidance for the purposes of not leaving a trail and should strengthen your case.

          1. LucreLout Silver badge

            Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

            In looking back at the email trail, that kind of behaviour screams avoidance for the purposes of not leaving a trail and should strengthen your case.

            I too took the approach you suggest, leading to her disputing every point raised and trying to reword everything to have a negative tone where the meeting had none. Continuing to dispute every meeting may have shown disparity of views and a communication problem, but it wasn't nearly enough to be sure of winning at court.

            Meanwhile she was poisoning the well, for example querying HR to find out what she could do to stop me "disappearing and working from home for two hours every lunch". The best part is that I could not physically get from the office to my home and back in 2 hours using any currently available mode of transport absent a helicopter. The manager was so delusional that to this day I'm not sure if she genuinely believed what she'd said, or if she was just making trouble behind my back.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

              The manager was so delusional that to this day I'm not sure if she genuinely believed what she'd said, or if she was just making trouble behind my back.

              That's the point, it's not sexism some people are just megalomaniacs and or psychopaths. Only a voice recording would be of benefit not meeting notes. You know the writings on the wall when you're forcefully told to break the law and put people's lives in danger without hint of irony. Again, would any other employer trust you not to stand up for yourself if they had a rogue manager. Best to leave of your own accord to better things.

              1. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

                Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

                "Only a voice recording would be of benefit not meeting notes."

                Completely the reverse. As pointed out above, a recording is a very grey area whereas contemporaneous notes are sacrosanct; the law has very different notions of proof than to us lay people.

        2. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

          Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

          "I couldn't prove whatever she said to me in a mtg room as her response."

          If, as soon as you got back to your desk, you typed up what she said, noting the date and time, then that would count as papertrail. Unless the company could produce equivalent notes (e.g minutes of meetings), contradictory evidence or otherwise show you up as an unreliable witness, then you would have a strong case -- especially given emails going unanswered.

        3. Alan Brown Silver badge

          Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

          "I couldn't prove whatever she said to me in a mtg room as her response."

          Spycam pens are useful for this kind of thing.

          1. Bernard M. Orwell Silver badge

            Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

            "Spycam pens are useful for this kind of thing."

            Be cautious with this approach, it's a legal grey zone. In some cases the judge will allow recordings made by an employee (or aggrieved party) only if they show clear evidence of discriminatory behavior, and in other cases they may consider it "dirty evidence" obtained by covert means and dismiss it. There's no hard and fast rules at this time.

            1. Uberior

              Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

              At a meeting with the internal audit team of my (former) FTSE100 employers I was frisked for recording devices at the start of the meeting. I had to leave my mobile outside and telephones were unplugged from wall sockets as was the videoconferencing unit and the room thoroughly searched including floor boxes, decorative vases and they looked above a number of suspended ceiling tiles.

              They didn't take a second look at the re-engineered "running man" emergency exit sign that a "contractor" had installed in the meeting room the previous day.

              Fortunately it clearly recorded everything from the bizarre or intimidating depending on your view searches at the start of the meeting, along with the thumping of the desk, raised voices and fist being waved at my face whilst the individual who was taking minutes was deliberately looking away...

          2. LucreLout Silver badge

            Re: I feel you are vindicated as well

            "I couldn't prove whatever she said to me in a mtg room as her response."

            Spycam pens are useful for this kind of thing.

            They are, but if your relationship with your employer has broken down to that degree, isn't it better to choose another?

            I know several people who were consientious hard working and talented employees that have fallen prey to bad management along the way (I've been working for a long time and meet a lot of people). It is always a shame when it happens and its always avoidable - anonymous 360 reviews for all line managers would ensure bad management is called out early.

      3. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        There's a penalty for playing the 'sexist' card

        Let's face it: every time you hire a [insert 'identity' here] you run the risk that this employee, if ever fired, will turn it around and sue you, costing you time and legal fees at the very least.

        I applaud Intel for NOT "just caving" and "just paying her off".

        So, *FINALLY* it looks like there's a penalty for playing the 'identity' card like that, in this case the 'sexist' card, "*FEELING*" as if everyone else out there is a bleeding-heart SJW just waiting to PUNISH "the man" [in this case, literally so] for all of those past grievances that SOooo many others [read: straw men] *SUFFERED* due to discrimination in one form or another, and therefore concluding YOUR case now has "merit" because, emotional manipulation, excessive jury damage awards, yotta yotta.

        I hope this has a 'chilling effect' against frivolous discrimination lawsuits.

        the only 'winners' in these kinds of things are the l[aw]yers.

    2. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      Trollface

      RE: Solarflare

      Horrible sexist you. Women are always victims. Feminists taught me that

    3. A Non e-mouse Silver badge

      For some reason the post was deleted

      Maybe it was because the case was sub-judice so under UK law (Which El Reg is subject to) it would have been prejudicial. Failing to remove the comment could have landed El Reg is hot water.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Well at least now we can push that point.......

        she sounds like a complete nightmare

    4. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge

      More to the point

      She's another example of a fool representing themselves. She should have talked to a lawyer to see if she had a case, and if she did, she should have hired a lawyer to represent her.

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon Silver badge
      Paris Hilton

      Re: Money here

      Would you care to elaborate, or are you happy just to induce some kind of fear response based on ominous tones?

      1. Gordon 10 Silver badge

        Re: Money here

        dum dum dum! I thought I'd provide the sound track.

      2. Bernard M. Orwell Silver badge
        Megaphone

        Re: Money here

        "I'd suggest commentators here be VERY careful on what they say"

        I'm not going to incite anyone to crime of any kind, I am not going to speak in support of a known illegal terrorist organization, I am not going to engage in hate-speech intended to inflame public disorder. I am not going to throw slander around.

        In short, I am not going to commit a crime, and I will avoid being sued for slander on a civil basis.

        Beyond that, I'll say whatever the fuck I like. When I like. Where I like.

        Fuck you and your "ooh. be careful with your thought-crime, citizen." and the horse it rode in on.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Money here

          You just committed a crime though. I found your language offensive, tough luck. Next time check what is on the legislative books.

          1. Agamemnon

            Re: Money here

            1. First Amendment. Don't like my language? Fuck you, and the horse you rode in on.

            2. To shoot down my own argument; I'm from California and can sue you because your tie causes me emotional distress (it really is hideous, really).

          2. Bernard M. Orwell Silver badge

            Re: Money here

            " I found your language offensive, tough luck"

            It's not (yet) a crime to say something that offends someone, unless you are inciting a crime of some kind. Of course, there are many people who either believe that, when they are offended, they are the victims of a crime or that causing offence should be a crime. But they are stupid people who'd silence the world.

            Here's the legislation. Note that the word "insulting" has recently been removed from the bill by amendment in the House of Lords.

            http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05760/SN05760.pdf

            If language is, specifically, "Threatening or Abusive" you can be charged, but the word "offensive" is not included, nor is there any provision for people "feeling offended". You can find my language offensive all you want, but provided I don't threaten or abuse you with my language you have no recourse to the law.

      3. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Trollface

          Re: Money here

          "if you’re going to criticise, be explicitly clear about the core facts and be as balanced as possible"

          Yeah, THAT will happen... *NOT*

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Money here

      >I'd suggest commentators here be VERY careful on what they say.

      Mr J Smith of 36 Otterton road, Iceland has piles.

      Go on, sue me Mr J Smith.

      1. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

        Re: Money here

        > Mr J Smith of 36 Otterton road, Iceland has piles. Go on, sue me Mr J Smith.

        But there aren't any roads in Iceland.

        Oh no hang on that's Greenland. Never mind.

        There won't be a lot of Smiths in Iceland though.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Money here

          There are, but neither live on Otterton Road.

    3. Tigra 07 Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: Money here

      Is that you Mary?

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Money here

      Roger that, I'll type it instead.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Money here

      Since when was our freedom of thought and expression granted by Magna Carta removed from us? How dare you threaten us! Oh, wait a minute, I forgot The Maybot was Home Secretary for 5 years....

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It was clearly about money yet she felt it necessary to play the discrimination card hoping it would help her case. When will people learn? I suspect if she had just gone down the lost commission route she may have won because removing commission after the fact because you change your mind on the persons role in the sale is tricky to explain away.

  4. 0laf Silver badge
    Meh

    It seems odd that she chose to represent herself in a case that could go against her. Was she overconfident, a bit greedy or would no one take on the case.

    None of us can know the real background to the case. Emails are evidence but they won't be the whole story.

    1. Velv Silver badge
      Boffin

      "...or would no one take on the case."

      Even in the less litigious UK it's rare to find a case someone won't take on as a "no win no fee" case.

      And the one thing I've learned reading about numerous court cases is that you never want to represent yourself (possibly even if you are already a member of the bar).

      1. MJB7

        Representing yourself

        There is an old legal saying "A lawyer who is representing himself, has a fool for a client".

        Having said that, there's no reason not to represent yourself for claims on the Small Claims Track. (But this is clearly not such a case.)

        1. Gordon 10 Silver badge

          Re: Representing yourself

          Representing yourself and then trying to trade legal terms with a judge is bound to get you in trouble.

          If 100k was really at stake she could have got a decent employment lawyer.

          Never go up against a big corporation unless you have a v good case - they can afford to burn 10 times the money on defending a case out of principle regardless of the rights or wrongs. Their legal budget will be bigger than any but the biggest law firm, your case wont even be a blip on their budget line.

          1. Edwin

            Re: Representing yourself

            Most companies would much rather settle than go to court. Court is public, and there's always the risk of precedent being set.

            For Intel to take this to court suggests they knew up front they'd win, or perhaps she *really * pissed them off.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Representing yourself

              The fact that costs were awarded against her strongly suggests that Intel made a reasonable offer to settle out of court, but she refused it. That's how you get costs awarded against you in England. Contrary to what you'll read on the Internet, the system isn't "loser pays"; it's "party who refused a fair offer pays".

              1. jabuzz

                Re: Representing yourself

                As a defendant to get costs in an Employment tribunal is exceedingly rare. You basically have to bring a baseless case and refuse any settlement offers. However the headline figure is misleading as the costs are only £20k, the rest is repayment of overpaid commission. Further Intel wanted £32k repaid in commission so she is actually only down £13k.

                Normally employment tribunal's bend over backwards to be "friendly" to self representing claimants. Finally employment tribunals follow a single set of "procedures" across the UK so it would be basically the same in Scotland regards awarding costs. Well apart from wacky language like calling exhibits productions and some terrible rules on disclosure it's all the same. If you can always bring an employment tribunal case in England or Wales, where the defense has to produce all documents relevant to the case even if they are predjudical to their case. In Scotland they only have to turn over documents you ask for, so obviously you can't ask for documents that you don't know about but might help your case.

              2. Aladdin Sane Silver badge

                Re: costs were awarded against her

                Looks like she pissed off the judge as well - not a smart move.

        2. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge

          Re: Representing yourself

          "There is an old legal saying "A lawyer who is representing himself, has a fool for a client"."

          When I represented myself, I found I had a fool for a lawyer!

      2. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        AFAIK there is actually no such thing as "no win no fee". You have to take out insurance against all the other costs, and it is expensive.

        The day going to law ceases to be a bottomless money pit will be the day of the Second Coming.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      It seems odd that she chose to represent herself in a case that could go against her. Was she overconfident, a bit greedy or would no one take on the case.

      The adjective that comes to mind first for me is deluded - she seems to have thought she had a case for playing the sexism card when, based on the evidence described in this report, that doesn't come into it.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "Was she overconfident, a bit greedy"

      She worked in sales.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I was lucky, our legal insurance covered wrongful dismissal. Contacted the insurance, got the name of a covered lawyer and let them loose on my ex-employer...

      The lawyer told me, for the first meeting, that I didn't need to go, as it would just be setting out the ground rules for the tribunal... An hour into the meeting I received a phone call, saying that my employer had agreed on a (reasonable) settlement, if I was willing to accept.

      Given I didn't want the stress of a prolonged fight, I took the settlement. The fact that in the next round, I might have got 25% more or nothing at all, also weighed into the decision.

      But, I had a strong case to start with.

      1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        I have to say that when I considered going to court for constructive dismissal, my lawyer advised me not to proceed because he suspected that the legal costs would bankrupt the small company I worked for. It's a Catch-22. Big companies may regard litigation as a minor expense item, small ones may decide to liquidate instead.

    5. Nick Kew Silver badge

      Representing herself could simply be all she could afford. That's not unusual, and the hot air we occasionally get about "equality of arms" when a highly-trained barrister faces some poor sod who has no choice is meaningless.

      Though come to think of it, scrub that. She did have a choice - just put Intel behind her and get on with life. Not a victim after all.

    6. Adam 52 Silver badge

      "It seems odd that she chose to represent herself in a case that could go against her. "

      Employment tribunals in England are *supposed* to be low-cost and individuals are encouraged to represent themselves. There are rarely cost awards to pay lawyers, despite George Osbourne's attempts. Intel would have had to pay for its QC itself. She probably couldn't afford it.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Everyone should be treated equally. End of.

    There are many advocating special treatment of certain groups to ensure just that.

    Special treatment in the name of equality is a concept I find difficult to get my head round.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Everyone should be treated equally. End of.

      Just lie down. Relax. Breathe in. Hold that. Breathe out. You feel more relaxed. We're here to help. Heads can be stretched. First, though, they'll need to be compressed. A bit. These straps will help...

  6. chivo243 Silver badge
    Coat

    Judge Smail

    Caddy Shack anyone?

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    She worked in sales, and everyone knows that sales and marketing bods just love the smell of their own farts. Every bad idea (or smell) they emit they automatically believe to be great. Perhaps she will now learn that her shit smells just like everyone else's.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      everyone knows that sales and marketing bods just love the smell of their own farts

      But not all people who love the smell of their own farts work in sales & marketing. I certainly don't.

      But, rambling happily off topic, I seem to have the lost the ability to drop real "daisy cutter" stenches that I used to. I'm hoping that under the rules under consultation to extend blue badges I'll qualify, and then be able to use all the zillions of disable parking bays, and park generally where I like anyway. Just remember when you see me sprinting away from my blue badge toting car, "not all disabilities are visible".

      1. HmmmYes Silver badge

        Stsy a green badge.

        At least youll have a firm termination date.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Overpaid Commissioner

    How the hell do you manage to overpay someone 32 grand based on a percentage of a sale and not pick it up before it reaches their account? Sounds more like a fine for challenging them to me.

    1. Velv Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: Overpaid Commissioner

      Many commission and bonus payments include provisions for clawback under certain criteria, and one of the criteria often includes continued employment with the employer. Presumably this has been a factor in this case and because she lost the dismissal case she invoked the clawback. Just speculating.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Overpaid Commissioner

      "How the hell do you manage to overpay someone 32 grand" - FDIV bug?

    3. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: Overpaid Commissioner

      "How the hell do you manage to overpay someone 32 grand based on a percentage of a sale and not pick it up before it reaches their account? "

      Commission is paid when (or even before) the invoices go out.

      I know of one case in New Zealand of an insurance salesman who as a parting present fabricated a number of bogus life policy signups, collected commission on them and then legged it out of the country before the company realised they'd been gypped.

      I knew him from school and knew he'd been in a number of dodgy dealings including a few fraud convictions. How the hell he managed to _get_ a job with a reputable insurer, let alone take them for a substantial amount is still a mystery.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Being a woman is no defence against being crap at your job and getting fired, it happens to men too you know.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Tell that to the social justice warriors out there

      They think they have a sacrosanct right to never be offended.

      They use race, gender, religion or sexuality as shields against criticism.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Women don't get fired because they are crap at their job. They get fired because sexism

      .

      The ever increasing, so called positive, discrimination in IT in favour of humans with a vagina should tell you they're considered a rare species to be coddled.

      If vaginas were irrelevant to performance assessment we wouldn't have Directors of Diversity and Inclusion.

      And if they performed better than the human with a penis then we wouldn't need said Diversity "Directors" either..

  10. Named coward

    Legal Costs

    I'm surprised no one has yet commented about the 20K in legal costs. How is this calculated? Is it actual costs for Intel's lawyet? In that case it's incredibly unfair - get a team of top notch lawyers and the prospect of having to pay legal costs is enough intimidation for the other party to drop the case?

    1. Ryan 7

      Re: Legal Costs

      Akash Nawbatt QC probably does cost that much, yeah.

    2. Nick Kew Silver badge

      Re: Legal Costs

      That's what happens if you get taken to court.

      But in this case, wasn't it her who went to court? Not so unfair when it's a consequence of your own action.

    3. Voidstorm
      Black Helicopters

      Re: Legal Costs

      Since the demise of legal aid, it does seem to me to have become "Justice is for the Rich".

      1. I3N
        Coat

        Re: Legal Costs

        If you want to read a sad, poorly written story - "The Lady is Blind," Balais

    4. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: Legal Costs

      "the prospect of having to pay legal costs is enough intimidation for the other party to drop the case?"

      Exactly. Think of it as a "burden of proof" hurdle that you have to overcome in order to have a successful lawsuit. This as opposed to "always side with the [insert 'identity' here]". That way, only the REAL cases will win [and no more 'just settle and make it go away'].

    5. I3N
      Pint

      Re: Legal Costs - there is actually a chart somewhere

      That was referenced during damages phase ... $425/hour if liability proven ...

      Otherwise my contract was about $200+/hour to take case

  11. Ryan 7
    Facepalm

    People like Guiney misusing the issue of gender discrimination with false claims is why genuine cases get discredited.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Commission Removed ...

    ... from a semiconductor salesperson because “A number of the [sales] wins were removed from the total [commission paid] due to your limited involvement in the work,” ???

    I find that very hard to believe given sales normally have very little (if any) involvement and field engineers do all the real work.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    opportunity missed

    Perhaps she should have worn a black dress?

  14. NBCanuck

    “strong, confident women”

    I know this is about performance, but wanted to point out her saying that they discriminated against "strong, confident women.

    One thing that "strong, confident" men or women sometimes fail to notice is that they can come off an loud, overbearing, obnoxious or display other undesirable characteristics. How you feel about yourself and see your own behaviour is not necessarily how others see you. Strong and confident are good leadership characteristics, but make sure that they is how others see you, not just how you see yourself.

  15. P0l0nium

    Nest question ... WHO HIRED THIS PERSON ??

    They should get the "Improvement Required".

    1. Alan Brown Silver badge

      "Nest question ... WHO HIRED THIS PERSON ??"

      The same one who appointed an incompetent female as executive director of a local district council.

      The council has made some Epic Fails recently. She stated in a public meeting of a bunch of pissed off residents that this was down to all issues being handled through individuals' email addresses and as such things could be easily overlooked.

      When I started asking questions about role accounts or a trouble ticketing or issue handling system, the response was "What's that?" - and when I explained, got a look like I'd just grown several extra heads.

      If she was a man, she'd likely have been gone the next day.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        >If she was a man, she'd likely have been gone the next day.

        Just for giving you a harsh look? Seems a tad unfair.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Discrimination

    Now she may try going to the ECHR to complain that the judge and opposing Barrister were sexist towards her...

    Roll eyes

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It does take some balls

    "[...] who represented herself during the week-long January hearing. She was up against barrister Akash Nawbatt QC"

    What does she do in her free time? Challenge Mike Tyson to a no quarter given fight?

  18. I3N
    Angel

    Think I earned the icon ...

    Having won the point FOUR times and beat back their only appeal ... hiring an extremely respected EEO lawyer was well worth it [the more low-profile the better - called SF told to try this guy in Berkeley] ...

    put a total of $300K on the line with odds of success 1/600 each time ... beat 5 federal lawyers and first judge lost his job ...

    I'm pretty sure 3 divisions heads, two department heads, and one executive director felt victimized ...

    Whether she had a case or not, that is what the process is about ... to watch my guy work in depositions and drop the hammer at hearing was great theater ...

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Clearly this manager had it out for her though. You don't send an email to a group of colleagues asking for what is going well and what could be done to improve for employee X if everything is actually going well. It is one thing if that is a standard review process for everyone, but when you do it for one person... it is pretty clear what he was after. It may be justified or not, couldn't say, but it is clear that he wanted her gone when he sent that email asking for feedback (assuming it was only for one employee).

    Sales is full of manipulation to favor of friends of the manager and that sort of thing. It is almost expected. Surprised as people might be to hear it, sales is not exactly full of responsible, mature people.

  20. GBE

    She appeared Pro Se (Is it "Pro Per" in England?)

    Guiney, who represented herself

    Ouch.

    Not all who represent themselves are kooks, but there does seem to be a pretty high correlation. Even if you're not a kook, it's still a good way to get your ass handed to you in court. At least in the US, it's usually possible to find a lawyer who will take this sort of case on a contingency basis.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Not sure all of the facts are correct

    "Denying me my commission payment of £100k (before tax) after unfairly dismissing me with one day's notice ... £25,000 was repayment of the overpaid commission"

    Having worked in technical sales, I can tell you that commissions are never paid too quickly and are therefore rarely overpaid. But I can also tell you that it is not uncommon for people to be fired just before their commission is earned so the company can avoid paying it. Experienced salespeople always quit just after they receive their commission, whether monthly, quarterly, or whatever. And most salespeople are ruthless, with sales managers being ruthless squared.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Important takeaway...

    Always draft your emails with the assumption that they may someday be read out in court.

    Winston Churchill - "History will be kind to me for I intend to write it."

  23. martinusher Silver badge

    Its the 360 thing

    Sounds like her boss was doing what Intel normally does -- its called a 360 or something like that where you get feedback about a person from both their colleagues and their supervisors. Its a bit of an obsession in the company, it takes up a lot of time, but I suppose the idea is to try to aggregate out subjective views of people so you can 'rank and rate' them accurately.

    In this case it looks like the company and its managers did their homework and she didn't. While its currently fashionable to point a finger and holler 'xxxxx Discrimination' and expect results in California I don't think this will work as well in Watford, they're going to demand documentation, not subjective feelings. (Actually the same's true in California...you've got to document everything....)

    1. Inventor of the Marmite Laser Silver badge

      Re: Its the 360 thing

      It's funny, isn't it, that àn employee can be asked for some kind of reference for a colleague and be expected to give an objective assessment, yet if that company's HR department is approached for a reference, all they will do is to confirm so and so worked there from ddd to ddd, for fear of being sued for giving a degrading opinion.

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Those who have the gold make the rules

    I wouldn't for a minute believe the claims by most corporate management. Sexism, bias and unscrupulous behavior exists in most large organizations. If you are not liked by someone in power you get black listed and pushed out the door. It's always done in a cover your arse manner so that if or when it gets to court, the abusers can claim they did no wrong.

  25. Adrian Montagu

    I have worked for many women during my career. I have to say that IN GENERAL I have found them better to work for than men.

    I really cannot understand why there is this animosity against women in the workplace. I find working with women quite refreshing as they have a different slant on matters. It keeps your mind open to other options.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      In the interests of equality I will observe that I have had two female bosses. One manages extremely well, the other manages by the technique of thin-lipped impatience.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019