An estate agent boss at Your Move is being sued by a member of staff, who alleges that she offered to ‘perform a sex act on him’ if he hit target.
Sarah Thompson is said to have made the offer to perform the sex act if Paul Elworthy hit his targets.
An employment tribunal at Croydon heard that Thompson allegedly made the offer at a boozy Christmas lunch in 2013.
Elworthy worked as a senior financial consultant for Your Move, and is suing the estate agency giant for constructive dismissal and sexual harassment.
Elworthy’s claims are said to be backed up by Giles Barrett, who still works at Your Move and was at the lunch.
The claims are reported by The Sun.
A spokesperson for Your Move said that as the case was on-going, they were unable to comment.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3521914/estate-agent-boss-offered-employee-sex-act-if-he-hit-180000-target/
Comments (23)
Would he be complaining if he’d hit target? Would she have “paid the bonus”?
I guess we’ll never know unless she settles out of court??
Well, he’s most certainly going to be victorious in his claim. Given that he has a witness to said conversation. Silly thing for her to say, but I suspect it was just that, a silly comment.
“Silly thing for her to say, but I suspect it was just that, a silly comment.”
Your suspicions are quite possibly correct. BUT – and this is the crux of the matter – whatever was or was not said has been reported and is now being dragged through the tribunal system, and broadcast to the world. And if ruled in favour of the claimant, there will be those (both within and outside of out industry) who capitalise on the ruling to suit their own agendae.
There is no place whatsoever for harrassment of any kind in the workplace. In this instance, ‘the workplace’ being wherever they were having their pre-Crimbo wazz-up.
We have, I have little doubt, all witnessed some form of inappropriate behaviour at some time in our working lives – and have dealt with it in whatever way we did at the time, which I also have little doubt in many occasions meant turning away and pretending we didn’t see or hear what happened.
There are only losers in this sorry affair. Let it hopefully be a warning to those who find themselves in similar sittuations-in-the-making that their next sentence or gesture could land them in the same situation.
What’s his problem? sounds like a good incentive scheme, beats M&S vouchers.
Best comment on the post!!
Boozy Christmas lunch – when will firms learn that boozy lunches are not a good idea.
What a stupid thing for a manager to say. There is no place for this sort of comment or behavour from the manager – im amazed others here think it fine to do so, or just man up and get over it. If any owner or manager had 2 brain cells you know you cannot do this sort of thing – its not right, proper or fair and it opens them up to litigation.
As a business owner or manager you have to be squeeky clean and above board with staff – and the comments you make. I simply cannot believe how stupid this manager has been and sounds like drunk during work time.
Um….bet you’re a laugh a minute on a night out.
One of the problems in the world today is that people are ready to take offence at the slightest thing and many will claim that this has damaged them in some psychological way. Where would we all be today if our grandparents and earlier generations behaved this way ? There is a difference between banter and harassment and the judges should make this clear by kicking out ludicrous claims with hefty costs against the accuser
Due to high staff turnover and the zero (except reputation) cost to the claimant, these types of claims are very common. Employment law protects the employee and claims like this, whether they have any merit or not, are very expensive and time consuming for the employer. Employment Practice Liability covers claims brought against the employer for wrongful dismissal, sexual, racial, disability discrimination. Given the amount of claims we see I am always so surprised at how few agents take out the cover, especially given it is not particularly expensive.
I was a manager with Your Move in Kent for about four years. I knew Sarah vaguely from meetings and seeing her at the odd function. I actually spent three hours in a bar after a Christmas bash with her and a crowd of others a few years back and she was great company/entertainment. A really motivated, enthusiastic, slightly loud but likable woman. She’s someone who would definitely join in with a bit of banter.
Without doubt that’s all this was…….. just a bit of late night banter. Clearly this chancer has just seen an opportunity to make a few bob. Absolutely pathetic. He should be embarrassed and ashamed of himself. #Man up.
Doesn’t make much sense to me, Boozy Christmas lunch should be no more than that, why people think they can bring up a drunken conversation in to a court room is beyond me.
If we get into the detail of what is or isn’t acceptable in terms of banter we will be here all day. For the case in question let’s leave it to the ‘likes’ and ‘dislikes’ to judge whether what I have said is OK or not. I see you’ve cast your vote already.
Wonder what cyberduck46, digital expert, and the usual suspects will have to say about this news article?
My guess is nothing – unless Ros has a fiddle about and somehow gets the words Zoopla or Purplebricks into the title or text.
That’ll up the comments!
What a pointless comment.
So you then post a pointless response to my “pointless comment”.
But here’s the thing – if my comment was, as you suggest, “pointless”… then what was the point in your responding to it?
Surely you’ve just given it ‘a point’ – therefore rendering your own as the actual pointless comment!
Funny thing, irony…
Top-quality PeeBee at his rapier-like best 🙂
Well done Sir!
Would have been rude not to… ;o)
I actually feel sorry for her. A throwaway bit of banter lands her on the news pages and the firm with the headache of an employee who is clearly going for the jugular. At least in bringing the case for maximum effect the bloke has effectively made himself unemployable in future.
Would you be making the same comment if a drunk male manager had said to a female employee “hit target and and I’ll perform oral sex on you?” I suspect not.
I just think it’s a case of a bloke seeing the opportunity to be litigious.
Let’s face it, she shouldn’t have said it – but there are bigger things going on in the world than a tipsy joke. (And let’s face it, she wasn’t going to go through with the ‘promise’ anyway because even though she was a little drunk she knew he was gonna get £100k tops).
How appalling, He obviously failed to reach his target then!
Lets all hope the case ‘comes’ to a satisfactory conclusion.
I suppose much of his case depends on whether the tribunal sees his claim that it was sexual harrasement a little difficult to swallow.