Called to HR for behaviour at an after-work event. Thoughts, please...

[DrLoveHandles]

Name changed because this is potentially outing.

I was at an after-work reception last week. There was mingling. I mingled into a group of four colleagues. All were holding wine. I was holding orange juice.

One of the colleagues - different department, never met him before - asked "Why aren't you drinking?"
I kind of waved my hand, said "Oh, you know, reasons" and laughed. I believe this made it clear I didn't want to discuss the matter without making things awkward.
The guy then said "Intriguing, like what reasons?"

I saw red. I basically listed all the reasons why someone mightn't be drinking alcohol and told him it was inappropriate to ask. I didn't shout or swear and I wasn't overtly aggressive. But my tone was patronising and I took a very forthright kind of stance (unblinking eye contact, standing at full height, no smiles etc.). I didn't give him time to reply, I excused myself from the group and went home shortly afterwards.

Today I got an email from my line manager asking me for a meeting with her and HR people to discuss what went on. Apparently, its a matter of unprofessional behaviour.

I'm not in a union.

I've never had any dealings with HR before. I'd be really grateful to hear anyone's thoughts on this situation. I mean anything - what might happen? What I should do to prepare etc?

Woke World. 😁

So if she had a hangover and fancied a night on soft drinks you think that isn"t something you tell a co-worker at a work reception where most people are drinking? What would be acceptable questions to ask someone in your opinion, assuming that you want to be just slightly sociable and not stare down everyone who asks you a "wrong" question, or any question?

So many people on here displaying their complete ignorance of how much harassment people have to put up with for simply not drinking alcohol.

OP didn’t ‘invite’ anything. He asked, she answered. That wasn’t good enough so he pushed. Has it not crossed your mind that answering the question may have disclosed something about OP that was private and that she wanted to be kept that way ? That she had a disability perhaps, or a religious conviction that prevented her from drinking ? Or that she was in the early weeks of pregnancy and not ready to disclose ? All of these things are protected by law and the questioner could easily find themselves in breach of it by insisting she answers. So in actual fact it’s the questioner who shouldn’t be out and about in the adult world because they clearly haven’t the social skills to cope with it.

Oops! Thanks. My account is private, but still, I'll ask for our posts to be deleted

If OP had just said they don't drink or didn't want one, that probably would have been the end of it. But saying, "Oh, you know, reasons" with a laugh feels a bit like an open invitation for someone to ask more. It’s hard to say for sure, though, as it could really be taken either way.

Yeah, bet he thinks that's a winner.

I see he can't answer the simple question, what business was it of this bloke's?

As for the claim that it's just normal conversation, I don't drink alcohol at work social events. I've never been asked to explain why, because presumably I don't work with people who lack social graces.

What would be acceptable questions to ask someone in your opinion

You actually want me to educate you in the art of small talk that isn't asking intrusive questions?? Is that what you are asking?

If she had had a hangover all day at work that lasted right into the evening you mean? So there would be a question over if she might still have been under the influence when she turned up to work that morning and making critical decisions or operating machinery?

No that isn’t something I would want to tell my coworker.

Well in my view any question that doesn’t force someone to disclose information that they would rather keep private would be acceptable. And just to be clear, asking someone why they don’t drink doesn’t fall into that category.

You think it’s ’more enlightened’ to be free to ask potentially embarrassing questions and then press the issue when you don’t get the answer you want ? Wow.

He didn"t insist she answered anything though, how could he have done that, I think you are confused about how the law works regarding random conversations in social gatherings involving glasses of orange juice.

He asked ‘what reasons’. Either he’s thick as mince or he has no filter and no social graces. And I’m not confused as to how the law works, at all. His line of questioning could easily intersect into any protected characteristics the person he’s questioning may have. That makes him a risk to his employer. And given the fact that OP was perfectly sober, the question is, was he ?

So you think at the moment people are not free to ask potentially embarrassing questions any time they want? You are confusing employers with members of the public, but do you think the police will get involved in two questions about a glass of orange juice?

Good point. Especially if they have form for running to HR !!

May be is doing some lifting there. Yes it may be to do with protected characteristic but this is not the same legally as the asking a black person where they are from example.

It's late and having to explain why the two situations are not comparable with regard to protected characteristics is too much like my day job (employment lawyer). But I'll try and explain.

As I said before, the man asking the OP why she wasn't working in a workplace was inappropriate. Someone shouldn't have to feel harassed by a co-worker into saying why they don't drink, but this stands regardless of whether any protected characteristics are present.

But these comments are not legally the same to comments about where are you from are said to a black person discrimination wise. In the latter case the person's protected characteristic is visible and therefore known to the commentator, and the comments are clearly related to that protected characteristic.

None of that is the case in the OP's situation. Yes, it's probably viable that she's a woman, but we don't know the OP's age and it may be the case that it's clear to people that age-wise she is unlikely to be pregnant. Even if she is of child-bearing age (a horrible phrase, but I can't think of a better one right now), the comments are not clearly related to being a woman or being pregnant. You might suspect they are, and you may be right, but that is not the same as making comments about origin to someone who is black.

In the case of the black person, IMO there is clear evidence to suggest racism and bring a discrimination claim against them on that basis, or to fire someone for racial discrimation. In the case of the OP, there is not enough to bring a discrimination claim against them or to fire them for discrimination.

If you or @Backtoschooloncemore would like to explain to me how I'm wrong, giving a legal basis for a case on the facts the OP gave us, feel free.

Begs the question why is it the OP getting their collar felt by HR in that case if he is such a risk to the employer? Would love to hear more detail on this though, it sounds just so out there TBH

"His line of questioning could easily intersect into any protected characteristics the person he’s questioning may have."

His line of questioning? Are you typing that in jest?

So if I ask my new co-worker where he is from and he says "Nigeria", are you saying that is some sort of crime?

She didn"t know the co-worker though, she had no idea what form he had, he now knows she has form for going off the deep end on very slight triggers and no doubt will avoid her from now on.

I'll add that I have cousins who do not drink alcohol because their childhood was marred by an alcoholic father.

They would have been really upset had a stranger tried to pressurise them into explaining why they didn't want to drink.

I’m well versed in the EA2010. Worked with it for over ten years. This isn’t even remotely a police matter, it comes down to a duty of care between employer and employee.

No doubt she’ll be highly relieved.

No. I'm talking specifically about the two questions in total - not just one, but both - that @Backtoschooloncemore gave. You can scroll back or search to find them.

Context is usually key.

And being discriminatory at work is usually a civil matter, not a criminal one. A hate crime act would be a crime, but you can be discriminatory without it being a hate crime. Sex discrimination against a heterosexual woman is not a hate crime, for example, because the law doesn't include that category under hate crimes.

Really? Couldn"t they just say "I had an alcoholic Father", that would be a great shut down line actually, most party pests would just move on at that point?

Why should they reveal their private business? And no, it wouldn't necessarily shut someone down.