Formal Complaint of Racism- Help!

[OhBollocksFuck]

I've NC as this is quite outing.

I work in the back office (10 people, all women, desk work) doing logistics for delivery drivers (27 people, mostly men, out and about all day).

We've had a bloke called Steve (not his real name) working as a delivery driver for years. Steve is black. Then another Steve came. So the original Steve became known as 'black Steve', which he's completely fine with, and new Steve became 'white Steve' which he's also fine with. We also have 'Short Trev' and 'Tall Trev' for two blokes called Trev. They're descriptions just to differentiate.

A new woman has started in the back office with us and asked me the other day what to do with an order which needed express sending. I told her to give it to 'black Steve' for various reasons. She's seemed quite nice, a little bit up-tight perhaps but that's usual when starting a new place.

Fast-forward to today and my manager has called me in the office to let me know that this new woman has put in a complaint about me using racist language. He's arranged a formal meeting with me and her for next Friday to talk through the complaint and see 'where we go' (his words). I'm in a union so I've got a union representative coming with me but I'm completely flawed by it.

I don't know what to do. I'm trying to remain calm and professional with this woman but I'm angry and upset. I don't want to mention anything to black Steve but, at the same time, it feels odd that there's all this going on with him being at the centre but him not really knowing. I also know that if I did mention it some of the drivers would take issue with her and I don't want them to get themselves into any trouble either.

I don't know what I'm asking really TBH. just some words of wisdom and advice from MNers would be breat!

OP, get some proper Union/legal advice.

Based on dh's experience, the workplace culture and the fact that your manager has used the name too is a valid defence against this. Those saying they would sack you for using might find themselves breaching employment law.

It doesn't mean it shouldn't be dealt with, just that the OP shouldn't be the only one to face the disciplinary process for it.

Culture is a defence if only one person is sacked but nothing else is done about the others who used the same terms especially when one is a manager. Someone would easily win an unfair dismissal case if this happened.

The boss needs to be telling everyone it's unacceptable, not singling one out.

I was under the impression, thanks to the John Terry trial, that describing someone by their physical attributes was legally ok as long as you weren't using it for discriminatory issues. So it's ok to say 'Steve is black' but not ok to say 'Steve can't do that job because he is black'.

I know a guy who goes by a nickname that if you heard would think was a racist term regarding his colouring. I'd heard of him for a while, shocked that people called him this name. When I finally met him in person he introduced himself by the nickname. I asked him if he wasn't offended by it. He said 'why would I be, I am xxx'.

Hope op isn't singled out for this though, they all need to have it addressed

Yes agree, all need to stop.

Agreed everyone should be challenging

Crap - challenged!

OP - Tomorrow, first thing, contact ACAS for advice regardless of what your union and employer say. ACAS has been most helpful to me in the past. 0300 123 1100

Or you can ask your question online from your website.

Apologises crazy what i meant was they can be offended but they cannot tell black Steve he must be offended too nor can they push a racsist complaint in his name.
Black Steve is not at a disadvantage to white Steve. Their skin colours are you to describe them. That is not racist as both are being called the same thing.

In this instance only black Steve can push for a racism complaint as he is the one affected nobody else. If he states he is not offended then anyone else who is will need to suck it up.
The law is very clear. Unless the terminology used is done so with intent to hurt or treatment of them is without equal opportunity then it is not racist.

correction THEIR website, obvoiusly.

Steve is black' but not ok to say 'Steve can't do that job because he is black'.

Spot on Magi

Agreed, Bubble. The case would go nowhere because the other Steve, the white one, would not raise a complaint.

Some parts of East London in the evenings are no-go.

Please explain exactly where these areas are.

I would be offended if somebody decided what i was and was not happy with.
Who are they to tell me what i should be called. I would feel unequal to have a complaint made in my name for something i have not found offensive and is also used to describe my collegue but i was singled out because of my skin colour.

anyways I am outing as I am still not convinced the OP is legit and as MNHQ are taking their usual stance of being quiet until we all tear each other down in shreds is not a fight I am up to tonight.

Either way this thread has brought to light some truly horrifying views on what people think should be acceptable in a workplace... who would have guessed it was 2016 eh!

Someone else has complained. It doesn't have to be one of the steves. Anybody can make a complaint of racism you don't have to be black to do so. The fact that the steves are not bothered doesn't impact on the fact someone else is bothered. Hence the company are having to take action.

Crazy i have this week completed a very intense course on the equlity and diversity act delivered by a man called Trevor Gordon. Fantastic public speaker and trainer.
My stance is not because i agree with racisim my stance is because he explained the 2010 act so well. What the OP has described is not racisim nor is it accepted racisim. It is descriptive which is ok in society and legal. The time that changes is when either Steve is treated differently because of their skin colour or when they are hurt by it. This, from the OP, is not the case.

Trying very hard not to insert a sarcastic comment bubblegum

You cannot equate your training (regardless as to who has delivered it) to my experience as a black woman in a professional work place.

I am never going to agree what the OP has said is acceptable.... what more would you like me to say?

The fact that the steves are not bothered doesn't impact on the fact someone else is bothered
Actually it does.
It is only racism and covered by the equality act if there is intent to commit harm or disadvantage. The term black Steve and white Steve are used only towards these 2 people it is not used across the company to describe all people of colour. Therefore an individual can be offended but the law is not on their side as the words used are only used for 2 individuals directly and who (as far as we know) are not offended.
So be offended all you like but if the company is following the equality act correctly they will allow the 2 Steves to be called what they choose. That is equality and diversity.

OP I feel for you.
Have to question other posters... why is white Steve not racist but black Steve is??

Nothing at all crazy .
I am not black i can only go on what i have been taught about the law and how it is interpreted.
If you would be hurt to be called black crazy then you have every right to complain.
However you do not have the right to complain on my behalf if i am happy to be called black bubble.

I know a 'Baguette' . A member of the professionally offended brigade was most offended when Baguette ended up finally telling them very publicly to stop telling people not to call him that. I am not saying this is the same situation at all but to make a formal complaint against one person seems very inappropriate. The Steve in question should obviously be consulted about this and in a work situation may find they have to gain a new nickname (whether Steve wants to or not) but one person should not be scapegoated for an action that is seemingly replicated through the whole work environment. I really hope it is the case that Steve has not been offended etc here and that things are sorted out for you soon.

Not at all bubblegum

Okay so we have a group of women who overhear overly sexual banter in the office.... not about them directly.... are they not allowed to complain because the men are not talking about them directly?? Of course not.
Does the the company not have a duty to protect the women in this scenario? Of course they do...

The sexual banter is not about the women but it's understood the men cannot go around chatting about "Slaggy wendy" even if she chooses to be called this.

The workplace is not the sum of one individual. So regardless of how Steve feels about it, the woman who complained was offended and that's the bottom line.

The only question here is whether the OP should be singled out.. I think not. Clearly there is a bigger issue here.

So please, bubblegum, stop twisting the equality act to fit your agenda

Of course I have every right to complain! And I bloody well would regardless of your feelings. And I'd hoped you'd be diciplined too.

You can be racist against your own race too you know....

Nemomemo Race, disability, being gay are protected characteristics. To highlight someones protected characteristic risks judging them by that characteristic (protected because its needed legally defending against historical discrimination and judgement) rather than seeing them as a person. So Steve may well be black. But he's Steve. Good bloke, irritating bloke - what ever, but primarily Steve.

Being white isn't a protected characteristic so the associated risk of racism isn't there.

But a sexist joke against women is made against all women so yes of course you can complain that it is sexist.
Calling black or white Steve "black or white Steve" is only directed at black or white Steve so no you have no right to complain on their behalf if the are happy and comfortable.

Nonody is being racist!! You need to learn the law crazy.