My boss reprimanded me and some of my other coworkers for avoiding a smelly coworker.

[joel666]

I am a 34 year old male and i work as a web developer. I am fairly good at it my work and get along with most other coworkers.

But there is this one coworker that started 2 months ago. I will refer to him as tom.

Tom is good at his job but there is problem with him.

Ever since i met him for the first time, he always had a strong stench to him. His odor is a mix of weed and unwashed body odor and on top of that, his breath smells really bad.

But i always tried being polite but me and some of my other coworkers who also noticed how bad he smells avoid him but we tried not to be rude about it.

For examples. When tom would sit near us, my coworkers and me would tell each other "why don't we go seat over there. This table is a lot cleaner. Why don't we use this computer instead. This one is kinda slow. When you come back from the bathroom, join us on that other table next to the window.

And when we would be in the lunch break room, we would stand there, wait and see where tom would sit and we would make sure not to sit next to him.

But on the bad luck that he would sit right in front of us, i would cover my nose with my hand. And my other coworkers would do the same.

But again we try not to show our disgusts. We don't gag or make any disgusted facial expressions.

But just a week ago, our bosse called me into his office and he tells me that tom feels excluded and me and the other coworkers are creating a toxic work environment and my clique attitude will nog be tolerated.

I admitted to my boss why we avoid him. I told him that i cannot stand the stench coming off tom.

My boss argued and said this is disrespectful and he could very well have a health condition that causes him to smell unpleasant.

My other coworkers later told me that they also got reprimanded.

How would you deal with this ? Health or not, i cannot stand smelly people. I try not to be rude but when someone smells bad my first instinct is to avoid them.

Your boss should be dealing with this. Not expecting you to just pretend it isn't there. We had a colleague so bad that sitting next to once made me actually throw up. Manager just sat him down and said Mate, we all really like you but your personal hygiene is appalling. We can smell you across the shop. You need to improve it drastically, shower and clean clothes every day. If you need products, I'll buy you them.

He did improve for a bit then slid back and ultimately failed his probation period. Not just for the hygiene but it was a major factor. You can't expect people to work with someone like that.

What you consider to be ‘right’ won’t protect you from what is legal if you operate policy outside the law. You think it’s morally right to force your employees to tolerate a significant problem in the workplace so that the employee causing that problem doesn’t feel excluded ? If, as a result, any employee leaves because you have made working there so difficult as to be impossible, then they would likely have a slam dunk case for constructive dismissal.

Similarly if you sack someone because you think that ‘morally’ they should have tolerated that situation, you’re going to get sued for unfair dismissal. You can’t pick and choose which bits of the law you want to comply with and which you don’t - as an employer, the law isn’t there for you to judge as being a ‘dick’ or otherwise, it’s there for the protection of your employees. And you have a duty to consider all your employees’ wellbeing - the law doesn’t allow for supporting one person to the detriment of the others, whether they’re disabled or not.

I’m glad you’re stepping back from the thread because frankly you’ve contributed nothing but a lot of moral claptrap which in the real world would bring nothing but trouble to any employer daft enough to implement it.

Some of the comments on here shakes head. It is difficult working closely with someone with a terrible body odour. I doubt it's a medical condition, if it was surely he would have mentioned it to the boss before starting the job. Your boss needs to politely bring it up with him. I remember being in secondary school and we had a teacher with HORRIFIC breath. A mix of coffee and like she hadn't brushed her teeth for a week. Students literally didn't ask for help because they didn't want her to come close and speak to them. I dreaded that class and would hold my breath often. Maybe you or one of the colleagues can gift him a perfume set for an upcoming birthday since Christmas has gone. The best though is for you to speak to your boss and ask him to bring it up with him.

No, not people like me. I work from home full time so don’t actually have any colleagues and when I did I worked with a bunch of HR managers who if this issue arose were able to deal with it in a professional manner that med everyone’s needs.

But I have in other spheres had to deal with people who smell bad and whilst an element of BO, dirt, bad breath, weed etc is bearable for most people, some people’s stench is on a completely different level that it is just not tolerable. I used to give a man a lift home from a local club and whilst the “oh I’m really hot, I need to open the window” worked for a long time when he just smelled of BO, sweaty feet and unwashed clothing, sadly he deteriorated badly and my car would genuinely stink for a week if he’d been inside it even for only a few minutes and I’d feel sick. A smell that goes beyond “normal” poor hygiene and yes is sad but still unbearable.

If you’ve never had to deal with that, and I expect you haven’t given how smug and superior you’re being, you’re very fortunate!

You absolutely have to find out if this guy has a medical problem. It must be asked for everyone’s sanity - particularly his in the longer term. Being excluded is mentally damaging. You need to know if it’s something you need to work together to find a solution for in a way that makes him feel acknowledged and valued.

I said I was stepping back from engaging with you, actually.

It’s quite clear that, and others, genuinely believe that it is acceptable to exclude and ultimately dismiss people because of issues beyond their reasonable control. Which is frankly, disgusting. It may be within the law, but it’s vile. If you’ve worked with disability, as you said you have, I’d hope you know that.

There are people in the workforce who are miserable, and suffering social exclusion and all of the worthlessness that comes with that, because people like you endorse it on the basis of it being “legal.”

Put the HR book down and look at the actual lives you’d be ruining by treating people that way. Whether it’s legal or not, people like Tom go home unhappy every day because people like OP turn their noses up at them.

I am incredibly fortunate to work in a position and place that doesn’t operate like that, and never will. Our employees are judged on their merit, and their work, not any of this rubbish. If anyone had an issue with that, they would by nature not fit with our company or team culture.

Honestly, you can continue citing legal frameworks. I would far rather operate with compassion and kindness than bother myself with whether it legally acceptable to make another human being feel like shit, intentionally.

But you still haven’t addressed what happens about the other employees who are not having their needs and rights met either ? Does the kindness and compassion not extend to them?

That you work for a poor employer that doesn’t know how to meet its legal obligations to balance the rights of ALL employees isn’t the slam dunk you seem to think it is.

Tom has spoken to the manager about the behaviour of OP and colleagues, and it seems, may have disclosed a disability as the cause. There is absolutely no obligation for anyone to disclose a disability to an employer. It may be that Tom didn’t think it would be a problem to start with and has only disclosed it now that he realises it is. Either way, the employer has to act within the law, and so do other employees. Management is now aware of the problem and they should be looking for reasonable adjustment. If none can be found, Tom can be let go.

But just for a second, imagine you have a health condition which causes you to smell, and that there’s nothing you can do about it. How would you feel if your work colleagues presented you with a perfume gift set ? Pretty crap l would imagine, and much more likely to seek advice on discrimination in the workplace because of a disability.

I think you’re missing the point.

I spent most of my adult life being the person people avoided and spoke about behind their back. What I’m trying to do is make clear how that feels on the other side, and the real impact of excluding those people on their wellbeing and worth within the workplace, and elsewhere.

I accept it is difficult to be around, but trust me - it’s far more difficult having it.

Of course. And I and others have said that there needs to be reasonable adjustments made. But the workplace can’t revolve around the rights and needs of one disabled person at the expense of all the others and their rights.

Not the same as a smell issue but I have a son with a disability. Sadly we have to accept that even when adjustments are put in place he may not be able to work in the environment he wants to.

Honestly - no idea. The people I work with wouldn’t make enough of a fuss about it that anyone would end up unemployed.

They would (have!) mentioned it, had the explanation and accepted it and moved on.

Where that hasn’t happened in previous employment, I’ve resigned, because the level of anxious discomfort that people feel knowing their colleagues have an issue that can’t be resolved, that is affecting their work relationships, isn’t worth the hassle of staying in.

With respect, maybe someone in that position can consider a WFH position. He may not be obligated to say he has a condition(if he does) but it makes sense to because it's unfair to those around him. Also if others knew it was a condition they would be more understanding and not think he's deliberately not having a wash. The perfume set was just an idea as colleague's give gifts at birthdays or Christmas in most cases by choice. At the end of it the best option is for the boss to politely say something to Tom.

My stepson is autistic.

If he was employed, fulfilling the role in all the expected ways and was an otherwise good employee - I’d be fairly pissed off if someone dismissed or excluded him because his colleagues didn’t like his autism.

Head, bang, wall !! It’s ‘moral’ to support the employee causing the problem, but ‘immoral’ for anyone working with them to expect to be considered. It’s also ‘moral’ to sack any employee who complains and to expect those who can’t tolerate the conditions to quietly leave without a fuss. It’s utterly baffling and begging for unfair/constructive dismissal claims.

You have said yourself that if the behaviour described in the OP continues once a discussion has been had about disability, it could be construed as bullying. Which is sackable.

Then only difference we have is that I wouldn’t sack for disability, but would for bullying. Not for not liking something, not for just not sitting with someone, for bullying. Which is different.

That’s not an appropriate comparison. The law doesn’t allow for other colleagues to ‘not like’ the disability - It allows for them not to be unfairly or disproportionately affected by it. If there’s no impact on them then that would be discriminatory towards the disabled person, and illegal.

The employer has to make reasonable adjustment for the disabled person to be able to do the job with no disadvantage due to that disability. That doesn’t just account for the impact on the person themselves, it accounts for the impact on others working with that person. In OP’s case there is significant impact on others working with Tom, so the employer has a duty to make sure that reasonable adjustment ensures no one is at a disadvantage. If no reasonable adjustment is possible, i wouldn’t be illegal to let Tom go.

I said that if the behaviour continued once the disability had been declared, that would likely be seen as discrimination. I also said reasonable adjustment has to be made once the disability has been declared, and that’s where we differ. You’re proposing that Tom continues to smell and everyone just has to put up with it. That’s not reasonable adjustment, it’s doing nothing. And if you leave other employees unsupported they’re going to find their own way of dealing with it, which inevitably means moving away or otherwise excluding Tom. That’s not discrimination, that’s as a direct result of you failing to address the situation. The law doesn’t allow for that, and if you subject your employees to this kind of toxic environment with no recourse but to either leave or be sacked for complaining then you’re in breach of the law and liable to be sued - successfully in my view.

I'm curious to know what kind of disability causes someone to smell of weed?

(maybe I've missed something here ? )

Presumably the mental gymnastics is that someone with some sort of debilitating condition smokes weed to help manage the symptoms and the condition causes them to struggle to shower or spray some deodorant on themselves.

Of course sadly this is the reality for some, but there's an even greater chance it's just someone that's a slob and can't be bothered. Lots of people who smoke and generally stink don't seem to notice on themselves.

Well I’m not, actually. It’s a shame that’s been misconstrued, but I actually listed a whole load of adjustments for another poster that I would recommend and have made myself.

Where we actually differ, is that once those conversations have happened, and the adjustments have been made, if those adjustments don’t create a meaningful enough change, my hope would be that colleagues would respect that and Tom wouldn’t have to lose his job after he’d tried.

I would hope that the view would be “well we’ve been told he’s got a condition, I can see he’s trying to manage it, that’s the best anyone can do.” Rather than “doesn’t matter what he’s tried, he still stinks, get rid.” Taking the legality of getting rid out of it, it’s incredibly unkind.

I absolutely believe there’s a conversation to be had, and I actually would recommend if Toms issue is disability related that he discloses that to the team as it can sometimes lead to more understanding.

My point is that whilst it’s legal to sack someone after they’ve tried to make adjustments for their condition, I don’t believe it’s right. I believe that if everyone is aware of the issue, and can see the changes attempted with their own eyes, people then should have more compassion and respect than to force someone into unemployment.

Why not ask HR to have a word and explore issues with Tom? I used to have a colleague like this, but we all put up with it. By chance I discovered he lived in poverty with no bathing/shower facilities, so it was a miracle he came to work washed and shaved.

Gout, Overactive thyroid, Hormonal changes, and the medications used to treat them. Hormonal conditions (some relating to menopause/hysterectomy) and liver disease can all cause strong smells. There’s also the question of certain aspects of disability such as urinary or faecal incontinence, which can cause smell if the person is unable to wash properly, or hasn’t the help they need to do so. Stomas of various kinds can also cause smell - colostomy in particular if not well controlled. These all have their root cause in disability and the person has protection in the workplace via the Equality Act 2010. The government is proposing that a lot more severely disabled people should be compelled to work, so in the future many of us are going to be working side by side with people who have these conditions. Judging by some of the ignorance shown on this thread as to what those conditions involve and the rights disabled people actually have in the workplace, l think a lot more public education is needed before that happens.

Which of those smell of weed?

OP has likened the smell to weed - doesn’t mean it is. Hormonal conditions can produce a smell akin to weed though, as can some skin conditions. Not saying any of this applies to Tom, just that if he’s declared a disability it has to be considered.

I don’t think you and l are that far apart in wanting the best for disabled employees. The difference for me is that as a disability support worker I’ve always had to be 100% focused on the law in order to support disabled people in the face of employers who will look for any reason not to recruit and any reason to get rid. Reasonable adjustment is a tricky thing and not always possible, and l’ve had to reluctantly agree in many cases that the only course of action is to let the person go. I applaud your commitment to disabled employees, but l think there are points on which we have to agree to disagree.