IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL


Reading

Case no: 27033399/2009

BETWEEN Mr G F Lewis Claimant

And

New College,

Oxford University Respondent





Witness Statement of Gregory Lewis







I, Gregory Francis Lewis of *****************, will say:

1. I was born in Oxford in 1964. I am of Black Caribbean heritage. I have been a qualified chef for over twenty years. (Pages 121-125) I have worked at several catering establishments, including head chef at Brookes University. I have done private catering for clients including Sir Ludovic and Moira Kennedy. (Page 129) I worked at Keble College, Oxford University from 1988 to 1999 as a second chef. On February 1st 1999 I started as second chef at New College, Oxford University. (Pages 21-23) I chose to change jobs as the Head chef at New College was closer to retirement; I thought there were better prospects for me. I won several awards from the Guild of Chefs during my time working at the university. (Pages 126-128)

2. In 2003 I received a wage increase that was smaller than I had hoped for and smaller than some of the other staff increases. In the letter confirming the increase, Catering Manager Brian Cole said that my ‘attitude and flexible approach would stand me in good stead for the future’. (Page 24)



3. I worked under the head chef, ***** for seven years. During this time I was working hard towards becoming the head chef on ***** retirement. Leading up to the time of ***** retirement he was absent for a long period of time for reasons of ill health. During his absence and following his retirement in 2007 I acted as head chef, and put in a lot of extra hours to keep the kitchen running efficiently.

4. At ***** leaving party he made a speech, during which he introduced me as the new head chef. The catering management were present and they did not dispute this.

5. I often received complimentary letters and emails about the food provided, including from the warden’s wife and the bursar of New College. (Pages 25-27) On the 3rd October 2007, I had a letter from Caroline Thomas, Domestic Bursar, awarding me £5000 acting up allowance and telling me that the college and the SCR (Senior Common Room) were very grateful to me for keeping the kitchen running smoothly without the full complement of staff. (Page 28) During this time we took on the extra job of providing meals for University College, leading to a lot of extra work for which the kitchen staff received a bonus. (Page 29)

6. I occasionally had emails forwarded to me, complaining about the food served at New College but most of these came from Michael Burden, the Dean, who seemed to have an attitude with me. The food rep for the Senior Common Room was David Parrott and he never complained about the food provided; his main input was to ask for game or items that he liked personally, to be on the menu.

7. Each week, I submitted my menus to management and food reps so that they could give input, suggest changes, etc. Neither Catering management nor the food reps ever gave any indication that there was a problem with the standard of my work.



Interview for Role as Head Chef



8. On 22nd November 2007 I attended an interview for the position of Head chef. There were three or four other candidates for the position, including a head chef from another Oxford University college and a Michelin star rated chef. Michael Burden, David Parrott (both Fellows), another Fellow (who has since left New College), domestic bursar Caroline Thomas and Brian Cole were on the interview panel. All of the interview panel were white and some white students also interviewed me as part of the process. All the other candidates were white males.

9. Subsequently I was informed that I had not been successful. I was also told that none of the other candidates had been appointed. I asked management what I needed to do to be able to get the position. I was told that I needed a more advanced food hygiene certificate so I asked if I could train for this and it was agreed. However, Caroline Thomas told me that it would be a good idea if I took a head chef’s position elsewhere and then come back and try again at New College.

10. I was hurt and insulted by this. Head chef vacancies come up rarely at Oxford University and often, they are filled by the second chef. It was after this comment by the domestic bursar that I began to suspect that management might be trying to get rid of me.

11. In July 2009 I received copies of the interview notes. (Pages 30-33) There was a comment on my notes saying ‘Mr Pangloss himself’. After looking up the term I discovered that it came from a book called Candide by Voltaire. The character Pangloss is consistently optimistic to the point of ridiculousness; remaining cheerful even when black slaves are mutilated. He is a buffoon, and the main object of Voltaire's satire in the novel. The novel also depicts black men as monkeys. (Pages 34-35) I found that Voltaire had voiced racist views in other publications, sometimes as ‘satire’ but I found it offensive. I was very insulted to have this reference made about me. None of the white candidates had insults on their notes, even when they failed to impress the panel.


I was the only Black Caribbean candidate. There have been no Black Caribbean head chefs at any Oxford University College during the 18 years I worked there. I felt that David Parrot used this term because it was hopelessly optimistic of me to believe they might break their convention and promote me.

12. After contacting New College’s representatives on July 29th 2009, (Page 36) I was told in an email that the term was used because I had not designed my own menus, that I used existing college menus and that I had assumed that I would get the job. (Pages 37-38) This explanation was without foundation because (a) I had designed or helped design, the existing college menus, and improved on some of the ones I submitted, and (b) I did not presume I would get the job, even though by the time of the interview I had been successfully acting as head chef for some time. This was probably the most relevant experience any candidate could have had. I believe these assumptions are racially motivated as they amount to a common stereotype of a black man - that he is lazy and stupid. (Pages 39-40)

13. It is common practice for chefs to use tried and trusted menus in an interview. There was no indication that the white men being interviewed were asked if they had ever used the menus that they had submitted, or if they had designed them themselves. New College refused to supply interview notes for the new head chef. I am confused as to how David Parrott could claim that all my submitted menus had been used before. It is not reasonable to believe that he could remember the exact menus from months, or even years earlier. Within one year that would mean remembering the exact structure of around three hundred menus. The position is supposed to go to the person that is most suitable. New College appear to have attached too much importance to the menus I submitted. The fact is that menus can be easily copied from other sources, it is putting them into practice that should count and I had done that.





14. In my interview notes, David Parrott put negative remarks in the strengths column. He made a point of mentioning in the interview notes that I had used a word in the wrong context (adding “sic”). My parents are Dominican, they use Creole as well as English, so I have grown up in a home where so called ‘perfect English’ is not spoken. I find it insulting that David Parrott felt the need to point my mistake out. He also describes me as “using platitudes”. The interview was for a chef, not an English lecturer.

15. I received a document from New College that they said will be part of David Parrot’s submission. (Pages 41-43) It is written by David Parrott on Voltaire and Candide. David Parrott has insulted me again in this document. The book ‘Candide’ is also known as ‘Optimism’. David Parrot has substituted ‘Malicious Stupidity’. He then continues in patronising language as though he is marking an essay by a stupid student. He is missing the point: there was no need to refer to me as any character from any era, much less an idiotic one from a racist era. He may be a ‘scholar of world reputation’ (as he describes himself in his writing), but he appears to have no idea what it is to be a Black Caribbean man, in what to me appears to be an institutionally racist setting. He seems to believe that I have no right to feel offended by anything that he chooses to say.

16. I was insulted and hurt when I found out about David Parrot’s choice of words to describe me in the interview. He will not accept that he insulted me, he insists on justifying the insult and adding further insults. I am insulted as a Black man by what he said, and all I expected him to do was apologise, which I believe he would have done if a white member of staff told him he had offended them.







17. The interview notes say-‘Veggies unimpressed’. Caroline Thomas (domestic bursar and part of the interview panel) is a vegetarian and had made comments before about the vegetarian options. However, I was never offered training in that area. A few years ago, the opportunity came up for a staff member to attend a vegetarian conference in Canada. Caroline Thomas chose to attend herself, rather than send one of the chefs. I said in the interview that the kitchen staff needed more training including myself.



18. New College have said that I did not get the job of head chef because I did not come up to expectations in the interview. I believe that eight years of working hard for New College, and ten years at Keble College should count for more than how well I answered questions in a pressured atmosphere. If management had ever considered my skills to be weak in any area, this could have been addressed with regular appraisals and training courses. In their ET3, New College say that they ‘applied the normal criteria and appointed the person who was most experienced and best qualified for the post’. In reality it appears that the only selection criterion was David Parrott’s subjective opinion. The person who was eventually appointed, Jak Knightson, was not shortlisted and was not interviewed at the same time as me. Although her qualifications were very similar to my own, she had no experience of working in a university setting.

19. On 4th December 2007 I received confirmation in writing that I was to continue the role of acting head chef until such time as a new head chef was appointed. (Page 44) My wages were made up to reflect this; the letter said that this would be reviewed at the time a new head chef was appointed. Despite my disappointment, I continued to work hard, hoping that management would change their mind and give me the head chef’s position at a later date.





Critical comments following my remark about health and safety

20. During January 2008 one of the fellows, *********and her husband, ********* came into the kitchen with Brian Cole, the catering manager, and began to collect some items. I asked her what was going on and she replied that she was making marmalade for SCR, (Senior Common Room) and had been told by management that she could have some sugar. I told her that in order to provide food for the college; her premises would need to be checked in line with health and safety regulations.

21. ****** then began telling me about her qualifications, but I explained that this made no difference to the laws on food hygiene. Brian Cole did not back me up at any time during this conversation, even though he is on an Oxford University consortium that has responsibility for checking that food supplier’s premises and procedures have passed all safety standards. (Page 45) New College’s Food Code of Practice states: ‘It is the College’s policy to purchase supplies of food and non-alcoholic drinks from firms and individuals whose premises and vehicles are hygienic and who operate sound practices through trained staff.’

22. I was then forwarded emails which had been exchanged between **********, Caroline Thomas (Domestic Bursar) and Brian Cole (Catering Manager), in which Caroline Thomas expressed her embarrassment at my response and apologised to *******. In the email ****** said that she accepted that I was responsible for health and safety standards “...until someone else is appointed”. (Page 46)

23. I was hurt because the domestic bursar and the catering manager had not supported me on following standard health and safety rules and Caroline Thomas had reacted as if I embarrassed New College by doing my job. I was humiliated by the implication that Caroline Thomas had discussed with somebody outside of kitchen management the prospect that I would not be appointed as head chef. 24. Even if there was a new head chef appointed, as second chef I would still be responsible for health and safety standards, (as are all kitchen staff, but particularly the head chef and second chef), so it was reasonable to infer that if I was only going to be responsible “until someone else is appointed”, Caroline Thomas had probably suggested to ******** that I would not continue as second chef. Neither Caroline Thomas nor Brian Cole spoke to me about what had happened even after ********* said in a later email that her husband understood why I had to intervene.


Appointment of new Head Chef

25. Around February/March 2008 I attended a course in Milton Keynes. It was arranged by Brian Cole (Catering manager) and I booked extra time off to attend and complete the coursework and exam. While I was there, I received a text message from one of the chefs in the kitchen telling me that a new head chef had started.

26. I felt that this had purposely been done in my absence, I felt hurt and humiliated that I had to hear about it from one of the junior chefs and not from a manager. I believe it had been planned this way and sending me on the course was a convenient way of ensuring my absence from the kitchen while the new head chef settled in. This situation made it very difficult for me to concentrate on the course, besides it seemed a waste of time now; I had done it because Caroline Thomas had told me that I needed the training to become head chef.

27. I was told by a teacher at school that I am dyslexic, and I struggle with written work. On the course I was told that I would be given extra time but I wasn’t, and consequently I didn’t pass. Being dyslexic has never held me back in my line of work before because most of the work is practical, and staff management in a kitchen requires very little written work. There are admin workers at the college who are available to type up menus and notices for kitchen staff.

28. After the course, I was so stressed by how I had been treated by New College, that I felt sick and had an upset stomach. My partner Tracey rang work to let them know that I would not be able to come in. I was off for a week and then I had a holiday booked.

29. During this period nobody from the college rang to tell me that there was a new head chef in place. On returning to work I went to the kitchen and the new head chef was in the office, a white female called ******.

30. I had seen her before, as Brian Cole had shown her around the kitchen several weeks before when I was working, but he hadn’t introduced us. I later learned that she had unsuccessfully applied for a similar position at another college, and that Brian Cole was on the interview panel. Also, she had applied for the job at New College, but was not shortlisted.

31. New College have not provided any evidence of re-advertising the post, or any interview notes for ********  interview. The references that have been provided were for the post at University College. I believe that she was appointed in a way that goes against equal opportunity guidelines and policies. (Page 47-48)

32. I had not had a chance to clear my personal things from the office before ******** brought her things in, and when I attempted to check my email I found that I had no access to the system at that time. At no point did management call me into the office to talk about the changed situation or put anything in writing to say that I was no longer acting head chef. My wages were not reviewed as had been stated in the acting up letter. I felt humiliated that most of the kitchen staff, and probably most of the staff at New College, knew that I had not been told about the new head chef starting while I was off. I felt it was done this way deliberately to make me feel worthless, and to undermine the respect that kitchen staff had for me.




33. During conversations with other chefs at New College, they said they had asked Brian Cole if I knew that a new head chef had been appointed and that he had said yes, he had phoned to tell me. I had no missed calls. My mobile phone number was displayed on the kitchen office wall. Even if he had been unable to reach me by phone, there was ample time to send me a letter explaining the new situation. New College later claimed that I had moved without telling them, this was not true and no letters came to my home address. I think it was hoped that I would be so humiliated that I would resign.

34. In spite of all this, and against my better judgment, I decided to make the best of the situation because I enjoyed my work and I got on well with the kitchen team. Several of the staff told me that they were angry with the way I had been treated, but I told them that if I had to accept the situation then so did they. I did not want anyone to put their job at risk by defending me.

Working under the new Head Chef

35. At first, ******** was friendly to me and I did what I could to support her in her new position. It was difficult, because the staff still looked to me for guidance, rather than her. She had no experience of working in a university setting, and the procedure is very different from that of a commercial restaurant or staff canteen. ********* provided recipes, with a picture, copied from books or the internet. The recipes were usually designed to feed four people, and they were often difficult to adjust to feed large numbers, and some chefs found this new way of working difficult. (Pages 49-50)

36. I had thought that my limited reading and writing skills were a factor in my not getting the job as head chef, but I found that ******** had difficulties in that area too. (Page 51)



37. It soon became clear that ******** had been given a more generous budget than that of the previous head chef and that I had as acting head chef. I had to keep within a £30,000 a month budget. Brian Cole had told me that New College already subsidised the food bill by around £200,000 a year, so it was important to keep within budget. The store’s manager told me that the bill for the first month after ******* started was £40,000 and it climbed to around £50,000 per month within a couple of months. Any chef knows that the higher the budget, the more impressive the menu.

38. I had been asking for new crockery for a couple of years but I was told that there was not enough money in the kitchen budget. ******** was allowed to order expensive crockery. She would also provide snacks and canapés at the request of office staff, to celebrate things like birthdays and maternity leave. I had tried to keep that kind of thing to a minimum as it strained the budget and the workload.

39. I was told that ******** last job had been the head chef at ****** in London. Documents show that ***** had spent only one year, (May 2006 to May 2007) working at ***** and this was as head chef for their events department, not as overall head chef. Several of the jobs mentioned on her CV were for part-time and temporary agency work and she appears to have had at least 12 different jobs in the last 20 years. (Page 52-56)

40. On June 26th 2008, I was forwarded an email from Michael Burden to Caroline Thomas, domestic bursar, complaining about the previous night’s dinner. As I said earlier, Michael Burden was the only person who regularly complained about my menus, and he was a habitual complainer. In the email he described the menu as ‘almost boarding school the whole thing’. (Page 57) Caroline Thomas had replied by saying, “Oh dear…Is she having any time off?”

Michael Burden probably knew that ********* was off and that I was on duty, as he would often check with the butler. What Mr Burden and Ms Thomas may not have known, was that under *******, I had no input at all into the planning of menus.

She would not let us change the menu in any way. So, Michael Burden was complaining about ******* menu, but Caroline Thomas presumed that I was to blame. Caroline did not discuss the complaint with me, so the only practical effect of forwarding it to me was to insult me. She had dealt with Michael Burden’s previous complaints the same way, forwarding them to me but not discussing them. The two of them are friends and they seemed to enjoy putting me down.

41. It soon became clear that ******** had issues with me. I was told that I was no longer required to attend diary meetings even though I had attended these both as acting head chef and as second chef under the previous head chef. ********* would often say to me, ‘We need to control you’, which I found very insulting and typical of a racist attitude. At times I felt as though I was an apprentice chef again, the way the head chef was constantly looking over my shoulder and making patronising remarks. Nobody was supervising the head chef, who often made mistakes.

42. Brian Cole called me into his office and told me that ******** felt that I was attempting to sabotage her work. I was surprised that it was referred to as ‘her work’ as the kitchen staff works as a team. I took pride in what I did and always tried to work with the team to produce the best food possible. I had tried to support her, which is what I told him. I was feeling constantly on edge at work now; the situation was difficult enough without these unfounded complaints and remarks. 43. New College had taken on a head chef who had no experience in a university environment and put her in a position where she was in charge of several chefs at least three of which had almost twenty years relevant experience each. It was bound to be an awkward situation and I felt that I was being set up to take the blame for any problems arising.




Disciplinary proceedings

44. At one point I looked at the diary in the office, which was left out so that staff could look at what special dinners and events were planned. The diary had several entries by *******, which seemed to be a record kept of anything that could discredit me. Comments made included: Greg miscounted fowl, Greg’s meal went pear shaped, Greg late. There were no notes about the mistakes made by the other chefs, all of whom were white. Oxford University policy states that staff should be informed if they are being monitored, but I only discovered it when I saw it in the diary. (Page 58)

45. On one occasion I was told by a member of the kitchen brigade that the assistant hall manager had been taking pictures of the food that I served on a day that ******* was off. When questioned about this, he had responded by saying that she had asked him to do so.

46. During September 2008 there were several members of the kitchen team absent and I was required to work some of my days off and through some of my breaks. I became very tired and I was late four times during one month.******* called me into her office to talk about it and I explained that I was finding it difficult to fit in my family commitments around doing the extra hours at work.

47. I assured her that it would not be an ongoing problem, as the kitchen team was back at full strength and I would be able to have my allocated days off and breaks.

She seemed to accept my explanation and apology, so I was shocked when I received a letter the next day 2nd October 2008, telling me to attend a disciplinary hearing for lateness. (Page 59)

I was allowed to bring a colleague to the hearing so I asked the accountant. He told me that he would not be able to come with me as he would be chairing the hearing if I appealed, so I opted to take *******. I attended the hearing on 7th October 2008 and explained my reasons for being late. Yvonne Goodgame (HR) and Brian Cole were present. The next day I received a letter telling me that I would receive a verbal warning which would be in place for twelve months instead of the usual six. (Page 60)

48. I did not receive a copy of the minutes of the hearing until they were provided in connection with the tribunal. (Page 61-62) I was not told why the ‘level of concern’ was such that I should be punished more than usual.

49. This was the first time I had been subject to any disciplinary proceedings in my twenty seven year career, including over eight years of working at New College.

50. I was so upset by what had happened that I became shaky and tearful and felt unable to cope. I went to see my doctor who diagnosed anxiety and depression and prescribed anti depressants. I was signed off work. I felt that I had been harshly treated in this matter and that it was racially motivated so I consulted Patrick Tolani at the Oxfordshire Racial Equality Council. He agreed that my treatment had been harsh, that it seemed to be racially motivated and that it appeared they were trying to get rid of me. He wrote to New College on 4th November 2008 advising them to reverse their decision. (Page 63-64)

Yvonne Goodgame wrote to OXREC (the Oxfordshire Racial Equality Council) on 7th November 2008. (Pages 65-66) The letter says ‘I can categorically state the College has no intention of ‘getting rid’ of Mr Lewis’.

51. By contrast, Caroline Thomas wrote in her letter of June 2009 (Page 97) regarding restructuring of the kitchen: ‘This is not the first time College has mentioned this, indeed this option was being discussed at the time that you went on sick leave’. I went on sick leave about three weeks before Yvonne Goodgame sent the letter to OXREC.

If Caroline was telling the truth, then Yvonne was not, and management had been planning to get rid of me at about the same time that ******* sprung the disciplinary on me.

Caroline Thomas’s letter also states that the kitchen had coped with being a staff member down since October 2008. While I was acting head chef, from April 07 to March 08, there was a staff member down and during that time the kitchen had the added workload of providing dinners for University College.

52. The letter from Yvonne Goodgame to OXREC (Pages 65-66) goes on to say that ‘New College retains the right to manage employees ‘robustly’, fairly and reasonably.’ However, in my experience, New College is lenient in disciplinary matters. I know of several white members of staff that are frequently late but are never subject to disciplinary proceedings. I know of staff that have physically threatened others on duty, taken on workers that do not have the correct papers to work in the UK and been repeatedly drunk on duty. All of these offences are gross misconduct, but none of the offending staff were sacked. In May last year the Daily Telegraph reported that New College had failed a health and safety inspection as the kitchens were dirty. (Page 67) I have asked New College to supply evidence of disciplinary action in connection with this, but they have refused.

53. I appealed against the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings, in a letter on 14th October 2008. (Page 68) As I was so ill the appeal hearing was not held until 19th February 2009. I wrote my grounds of appeal with the help of OXREC and sent these to Caroline Thomas on the 9th February 2009. (Pages 69-70)

The accountant was not at the appeal hearing, Caroline Thomas and the librarian, Naomi Van Loos were. The appeal hearing was extremely stressful for me, as soon as I got near to the college, I started shaking and sweating. I was repeatedly asked if I had anything else to say, but I was too upset to speak about it and just relied on the fact that everything I wanted to say was in my printed grounds for appeal.

54. I received a letter from Caroline Thomas on 23rd February telling me that my appeal had been unsuccessful and that they considered the punishment given to be appropriate in the circumstances. (Pages 71-72) This letter contained the words ‘verbal warning (confirmed in writing)’, at least six times. It was obvious to me that Caroline was angry about the letter from the Racial Equality Council.

I later received the minutes from the appeal hearing. (Page 73) The minutes did not include any discussion of my grounds of appeal by Caroline Thomas and Naomi Van Loos but, once again, they mentioned verbal warnings being confirmed in writing.

55. Nowhere in this letter (Pages 71-72) did it explain what the circumstances were that made them feel it was appropriate to give me a harsher punishment than was normal for what was a first and minor offence. The letter also mentioned that I had not accepted any help offered by the college. The college had offered me mentoring. This would not have addressed the issues. All I wanted the college to do was treat me fairly and with respect and for somebody to explain why I was being treated so badly. New College has a ‘Dignity and Respect Policy’, but it was not applied to me. (Page 75)

56. If the college had offered me any kind of mediation, I believe it would have helped at this point. I had a lot of issues that I needed to discuss around my treatment by management, but the only people contacting me were Caroline Thomas and Yvonne Goodgame and I had already made a complaint about their racial discrimination.

I later discovered that there is a harassment officer at New College and an equalities officer based at Oxford University, but at no time were these services offered to me.

57. In August 2009 I received a document from New College; a copy of an email from Brian Cole to Yvonne Goodgame regarding my disciplinary hearing and that of a white chef. (Page 74) It is dated 17/10/08 which is ten days after my disciplinary hearing.

The email says that whoever sits in on the meeting should be aware of ‘the facts that’. Then follows a list of allegations, including that I left the kitchen team alone to do other things. This could only refer to sometime before the new head chef was taken on, as it was not usually my responsibility to supervise the team after that. As the new head chef had been in place for around six months before my disciplinary hearing, I do not see the relevance. I was never made aware of these so called facts. This goes against the ACAS code of practice. (Pages 76-78)

The email also said that the white chef had admitted knowingly defying instructions. It appears that he at least knew what he was being accused of.

58. Brian Cole also says that a late shift would not mean working much later than 9pm. Working until 9pm is late if you have started at 7am. While I was at New College, Brian Cole was only present during college dinners less than six times a year and only for important events, he usually only works between 9am and 4pm. The kitchen is an environment where you have to work on a flexible basis. During a two week period, at least four days would be split shifts.

This can mean working up to eleven hours a day, so breaks, appointments, and any shopping for last minute ingredients have to be fitted in. We used to use the clock card system in the kitchen, but management stopped us using it as it showed that chefs were working far too many hours and the overtime bill was huge.

59. I also received a copy of an email sent from ********, dated 11/02/09, four months after my disciplinary hearing but eight days before my appeal. (Page 79) In it, she falsely accused me of being late “nearly every day” but she only ever discussed my being late on one occasion, which was the day before I received the letter about the disciplinary hearing.

Brian also alleges that kitchen staff have had to phone to get me out of bed after the shift had started. The only staff member that has rung me early enough to wake me is a chef called *****. ****** got lifts to and from work with ******on several occasions. ****** is known for being a gossip and a troublemaker, he frequently told tales to and about management. On one occasion he told me that the catering manager, Brian Cole was ordering fifty steaks every week for his own personal use and charging it to the New College account. Another time he said that the catering manager and the hall manager were drinking alcohol on duty and were intending to drive home drunk.


60. I asked the catering manager about the steaks, as the budget was partly my responsibility at that time, but I did not take anything that ****** said, very seriously.

61. If Brian Cole or any of the management were considering ******* or any other allegations when disciplining me, then I should have been told about them and given a chance to answer them.

62. At the time that I was disciplined for lateness, a white chef was disciplined for failure to follow instructions, unsatisfactory conduct and standard of work. He asked me to attend the hearing with him, which I did. In the letter telling him the outcome of the hearing it said that he had chosen not to take a colleague with him; it seems that by then I did not even count as a colleague (Page 80)

63. He was given a twelve month written warning, with his performance to be reviewed monthly, but this was cut down to six months on appeal. (Page 83)

In his appeal he said that his disciplinary hearing had been unprofessional, factually false and the catering manager was blunt. He then suggested that I had a problematic working relationship with Jak, which seems to have redeemed him. (Page 81-82) New College said that his punishment was reduced due to an improvement, but I do not see how he could have improved when his appeal was only two weeks later.

64. New College have told the tribunal that I ‘misunderstood’ the fact that I was given a verbal warning because it was confirmed in writing. I understand perfectly. I know they called it a verbal warning, however, I was not given the warning verbally at any time, and it was not given for the usual six months. (Page 84)



Prolonged illness



65. Yvonne Goodgame wrote to me on March 5th 2009 to tell me that my sick note had expired. (Page 85) In this letter Yvonne said, ‘I feel it is only fair and reasonable to advise you at this stage that the college will need to discuss possible proposals in relation to the kitchen environment’. I was upset by this statement as it appeared to be a threat to either demote me or make me redundant.

66. If New College were being genuine about the staff situation and about wanting to make savings, they could have decided that they did not need to advertise for a new head chef and allowed me to make the natural progression to head chef. The university guidelines on recruitment would have allowed for this. (Page 48) The head chef’s position was advertised at £47,000 a year yet the last head chef had only been on £35,000 for a short time when he retired.

67. I was on £30,000 as acting head chef and I would have been happy to take on the position at that salary. The catering management’s wages would probably increase in line with the increase in the head chef’s salary, so clearly there was no saving there. I asked New College to provide evidence of their plans to restructure the kitchen and of the economic advantage in doing so, and they have refused. I am sure that any sort of restructuring would have to be agreed by the finance department, involving the accountant and the bursar.

New College claim in the ET3 that my dismissal was for a fair reason, if not medical grounds then for economic reasons.

68. I wrote to Yvonne Goodgame on 12th March 2009, expressing my dissatisfaction with the outcome of the appeal and explaining that I thought the last letter received from New College had been a threat to demote me. (Page 86)

69. She replied on 16th March 2009. (Page 87) Her reply said that, ‘whilst change may be required’ New College were ‘keeping me in the loop’ and informed at all stages. They had not kept me “in the loop” when they took on *********. It did not mention that any grievance procedure was open to me.

70. On the advice of the racial equality council, I sent in an ET1 claiming racial discrimination which was accepted and listed for 28th September 2009.

71. Yvonne Goodgame sent me a letter dated 18th March 2009 asking for consent to access my medical records. (Page 88)

72. Caroline Thomas wrote to me on 26th March 2009 (Page 89) to inform me that an appointment had been made for me with the college doctor, Dr Sichel. It also said that the college would like me to attend an appointment with the university’s occupational health department and needed my consent to get a medical report from my GP, so I sent it to New College on 1st April 2009. (Page 90)

73. I attended the appointment with the college doctor on 7th April 2009. I found the appointment very stressful and got upset when asked questions about the treatment I had received from New College.***** told me that anything I discussed regarding personal feelings would be confidential and that he was just writing a medical report. However when I received a copy of his report it was clear that this was not the case. His report did not mention how long he thought I would be unfit for work. (Pages 91-92)

74. On 18th May 2009 I received a letter telling me that an appointment had been made for me with the occupational health department. (Page 93) It also said that this had been done with my agreement; however I had not agreed to it as I had forgotten that the college had asked for it. I had to cancel the appointment and informed Caroline Thomas that I would not be attending as the previous appointment with ******* had been so stressful. (Page 94)

75. On 17th June 2009 I received a letter from Caroline Thomas telling me she felt that their only option was to proceed with a medical capability hearing. (Page 95) The letter stated that I was at risk of being dismissed whether I attended the hearing or not. On June 19th 2009, Tracey wrote back to say that I was not well enough to attend. (Page 96) By now I was feeling continually stressed by harassment from New College that carried on even while I was signed off sick.

76. On 26th June 2009 I received a letter from Caroline Thomas saying that the reason I had given for not attending the medical capability hearing was ‘I believed the college’s attempt to resolve my ongoing absence was an act of bullying and harassment by the college’. (Page 97) These were her words; neither Tracey nor I had used these words. However, by then I felt I was being harassed by the HR officer, the domestic bursar and by their legal representative. The letter also gave a new date for a hearing. It also said that it had been hoped I would attend an occupational health appointment to obtain a second opinion. Caroline did not offer to address my grievances, even though she had clearly recognised my complaints.


77. I did not believe that anyone else on the University’s payroll would be sufficiently impartial or independent to write a medical report, so Tracey wrote to New College on 29th June 2009. (Page 98) Occupational Health are supposed to look at making reasonable adjustments to help you back to work, and the only adjustments I needed were an apology and an assurance that I would not be treated so badly in the future.

78. Tracey e-mailed Caroline Thomas to ask if they had received a medical report from my GP, as I had not seen a copy. Caroline Thomas replied that they had not requested a report from my GP as in her experience they were ‘very limited and ambiguous’. (Page 99-100) Tracey told her that the process would not be fair if New College only wanted to use medical professionals in their employ and that my GP was surely the best person to give a report as he had treated me throughout my illness.

We were told that if we wanted to use my own GP’s report then we should obtain one. The email also said that it was only relatively recently that I had refused to attend the Occupational Health appointment; in fact it was six weeks earlier. New College say they sent a detailed request for a report to my doctor in July, but although Caroline Thomas refers to Dr Sichel’s report as ‘detailed’, it does not give any indication of when I would be able to return to work or suggest any ‘reasonable adjustments’.

79. On August 13th 2009, New College went ahead with a medical capability hearing. Tracey had told them that I was still too unwell to attend, that it was impossible to give any indication of when I would be able to return to work and that I wanted my GP’s report to be taken into consideration.

80. I received a letter dated 14th August 2009, informing me that the outcome of the hearing was that I was dismissed with ten weeks notice. Pages (101-102) The hearing had been carried out by Yvonne Goodgame and Caroline Thomas, both of whom at the time remained the subject of my unresolved complaint of racial discrimination.

The letter stated that the college had been unable to obtain a medical report from my GP. I gave signed permission for New College to obtain this on 1st April 2009 but they say they contacted my GP on 2nd July 2009. Pages (105-107) The medical practice have no record of receiving this request, despite their procedure being to scan and file every document that comes in.

81. I was offered the right to appeal against the decision but declined as it was clear to me that New College, in particular, Caroline Thomas and Yvonne Goodgame had been trying to get rid of me for a long time and as they seemed to be the only ones making decisions regarding my future, I felt unable to fight their decision in the circumstances. (Page 108)

82. My GP wrote to David Palfreyman, the bursar, on 21st August 2009, explaining that my mental state was the result of stress at work but David Palfreyman did not reply to this letter or contact me to get more details. (Page 109)

83. On the advice of OXREC I sent a claim to the Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal.





Tribunal proceedings

84. In July 2009 New College’s representative, Duncan Edwards, wrote to my partner Tracey to say that he was considering making an order for costs against me so I should consider withdrawing my claim. The bundle of documents they sent did not appear to offer any reasons for their treatment of me; it contained more proof of their racial discrimination. Tracey told him that we would not be withdrawing the claim.

85. The tribunal hearing on September 28th 2009 was converted to a pre hearing review as Duncan Edwards had put forward that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim as he believed the grounds of the grievance had not been sent to New College before filing the ET1. Although I believed that I had submitted a grievance and in time, I had no access to legal advice and the claim was struck out. I appealed but the decision remained.

86. I had a letter from the Oxford Equality and Human Rights Council, to take to the tribunal. (Page 110) It states that I was convinced from the start that I was being racially discriminated against, and that it had been hoped that the college would resolve the issue.

87. On 29th September 2009 my partner wrote to David Palfreyman, the bursar of New College, telling him that New College management had racially discriminated against me and used the services of business consultants against me, including dismissing me. (Page 111) I received no response to the letter.

88. David Palfreyman is director of the Oxford Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies, which offers a mediation service to universities all over the UK. He has written books on managing universities and the law. He runs conferences at New College on university management.

I am saddened that he chose to pay business consultants and solicitors to try and scare me off rather than investigate and try to resolve my complaints of racial discrimination.


Institutional Racism



89. There were no Black people in management positions at New College, the whole time I worked there. New College claimed on a section 65 response, that a black female worker (who started only a few months before I left), was an IT manager. She is listed on the New College website as an IT support worker. (Page 112)

90. I heard that New College have taken on a black male in the offices since I left. He has been taken on day trips and nights out and Yvonne Goodgame, the HR officer, has taken pictures of him and posted them on her face-book page. In my experience the first thing a person accused of racism will say in their defence is that they have a ‘black friend’. (Page 113) Yvonne Goodgame started an unsuccessful face-book ‘campaign’ to get another black member of staff to join her group of face-book ‘friends’. (Page 114)

91. My parents taught me that there is always a possibility that there will be racist people, anywhere you work, but you must turn the other cheek and get on as well as you can. With hindsight it seems that I should have complained every time I felt that I was being racially discriminated against. In reality, had I done this, I am sure that I would not have lasted in the job as long as I did. I knew two people that worked in New College kitchen that complained of racial discrimination and they were both paid some money and asked to leave. I did not want that to happen to me. I felt that I had been working too hard and too long to walk away and start again.

92. The atmosphere at Oxford University is often one of racial prejudice. I have seen students ‘blacked up’ for a so called fun night out.





Some New College students have been complained about for publishing racism in their newsletter and many seem to be oblivious to when they are being offensive. (Pages 115-116) Several times I have heard racist remarks being made.

One student remarked that his soup smelt like a Thai brothel. The IT department provide induction slides that include negative stereotyping of Nigerian men. (Page 117)

93. In a recent survey at Oxford University, staff felt that little needed to be done to promote racial equality. However, there were a number of complaints of racism and one citing ‘institutional racism’. Students felt that more needed to be done to challenge ‘racist jokes’ and they pointed to a lack of diversity among lecturers. The Oxford University action plan includes cultural sensitivity training for senior management. This was reported in the Times. (Page 118)

94. There is no evidence that my complaints of racial discrimination have been investigated at New College. I have not been contacted by anyone at the college regarding an investigation into my grievances, even after they received the ET1, and other letters containing grievances including the letter from my doctor.

95. Their response to my complaints has been to try and get everything struck out, to dismiss me and to harass and insult me further through their representatives, whilst keeping up the pretence of following correct procedure. I recently received a letter from another solicitor, representing New College, threatening me with court action. (Page 119)


96. In their ET3 response, New College refer to me as being ‘consistently hostile and recalcitrant’. I believe they are racially stereotyping me again. (Page 120) I have been beaten down by them and I believe they expected me to shuffle my feet, say yes massa, and act as if I am grateful to them for destroying my career and my health.

97. I am forty six years old and I have been a chef since I was seventeen. I do not know how to do anything else, but I do not want to be a chef anymore, New College have taken away all the joy and enthusiasm that I had for the work. For the first time in my life I am living on benefits. I have gone from being happy and healthy to being so depressed that I have to take tablets every day to cope with getting out of bed and facing the day ahead. I have high blood pressure. (Page130)

I am signed off as unfit for work. I do not know when I will be able to return to work or what I will be able to do.

My trust in people has gone; I am scared that if I do ever get back to work, another employer would do the same thing to me.

98. Notwithstanding the tribunal’s decision at the PHR, and the tribunal’s acceptance of New College’s submission about the timing and wording of the ET1, it contained a complaint of racial discrimination, and in any case I was being unfairly treated. Given the racially motivated remarks, and the white comparators, I believe that unfair treatment was on account of my race, my heritage and my skin colour. New College dismissed me on grounds of medical capability.

99. While I accept that I was ill, my illness was the result of the treatment I had been subjected to by, among others, the very people who decided to dismiss me. At the time of my dismissal, they were the subject of an unresolved grievance and a complaint of racial discrimination to the ET. They were, by definition, incapable of making an unbiased decision, which probably explains why they did not obtain all the medical evidence that they could have had, such as the impartial evidence from my GP. They claim to rely upon a report from the college doctor even though it did not contain the very information they should have been using. (Page 103-104)





I believe that everything I have said in this statement is the truth.

Gregory Lewis