[imagesource: Getty Images / iStock]

A British employment tribunal has ruled that commenting on a man’s baldness is equivalent to remarking on a woman’s breasts, and thus constitutes sexual harassment.

Baffling, I know.

Tony Finn, the um, hairless man in question, worked as an electrician for 24 years at the West Yorkshire-based British Bung Company.

But then he was fired for misconduct in May 2021 after presenting his boss with a police statement, which the firm allegedly saw as an attempt at intimidation.

This all happened because Finn’s head sans hair was insulted, reported Sky News:

He complained that he was a victim of sexual harassment, due to comments made about his lack of hair, including being called a “bald c***” by factory supervisor Jamie King during an argument in 2019.

Describing the argument, Mr Finn told the panel: “I was working on a machine that I had to cover awaiting specialist repair.

“The covers were taken off, and it was apparent that Jamie King had done this. When I spoke to him about it, he began to call me a stupid bald c*** and threatened to deck me.”

Finn argued that this situation left him feeling “fearful for my personal safety”, and thus brought a case against the company to the employment tribunal.

Led by Judge Jonathan Brain, the three-person tribunal had to decide if calling someone bald is an insult or harassment.

Cue their argument:

“In our judgment, there is a connection between the word ‘bald’ on the one hand and the protected characteristic of sex on the other,” the judgment said. [The company’s lawyer] was right to submit that women, as well as men, may be bald. However, as all three members of the tribunal will vouchsafe, baldness is much more prevalent in men than women. We find it to be inherently related to sex.”

They went on to compare the issue of sexual harassment as it relates to women and their actual sex organs:

The tribunal said that in a previous case a man was found to have sexually harassed a woman by commenting on the size of her breasts, stating that it is more likely the person receiving a comment “such as that which was made in (that) case would be female”.

“So too, it is much more likely that a person on the receiving end of a remark such as that made by Mr King would be male,” the tribunal said.

The tribunal ruled that King made the remark with the purpose of insulting Finn based on his appearance.

Doing so was “a violation of the claimant’s dignity, it created an intimidating environment for him, it was done for that purpose, and it related to the claimant’s sex”.

Finn’s claims of sexual harassment, unfair dismissal, and wrongful dismissal were upheld by the tribunal. However, his claim of age discrimination was dismissed.

Finn’s compensation is still to be decided by the court.

[source:skynews]