Calling someone a ‘Karen’ is ‘borderline racist, sexist and ageist’, tribunal says

In a recent tribunal ruling, Employment Judge George Alliott asserted that the term 'Karen' is a pejorative label that can be considered 'borderline racist, sexist and ageist.' This statement arose during the case of Sylvia Constance, a 74-year-old black British woman who claimed she was unfairly dismissed from her position at Harpenden Mencap, a charity supporting adults with learning disabilities. Constance alleged that her termination on June 13, 2023, was due to an 'irrevocable breakdown in the relationship' with the organization, which she contended was rooted in racial discrimination. The tribunal was informed that prior to her dismissal, Constance had been suspended based on accusations of 'emotional/psychological abuse of a tenant in your care' and 'bullying and intimidation of colleagues.' These claims were central to the tribunal's examination of Constance's allegations of discrimination and victimization at the hands of her employers.

During the proceedings, Constance's legal representative, Christine Yates, criticized the behavior of the charity's management, characterizing their actions as emblematic of the stereotypical 'Karen' archetype. Yates argued that the management had exploited their privilege and authority against Constance, fabricating allegations to distract from their own misconduct while encouraging residents to partake in discriminatory behavior. However, Judge Alliott ultimately dismissed Constance's claims, asserting that the complaints against her were legitimate and did not constitute a targeted racist campaign. This ruling highlights the complexities involved in cases of alleged workplace discrimination, especially when intersecting issues of race, gender, and age are at play, underscoring the tribunal's role in navigating these sensitive dynamics within employment law.