A Barclays worker has lost a discrimination case after being driven to leave her job by 'unpleasant, distressing and sexualised' calls she received while dealing with wealthy customers. The hearing was told the calls 'triggered flashbacks' from Kim Modeste's past and left her 'deeply upset'.
Ms Modeste answered three calls from two men and the panel heard she then went off work sick due to stress as she was finding it 'all very difficult'. However, she did not reveal that she was suffering from post traumatic stress disorder and later quit.
Her claims have now been dismissed by a Scottish employment tribunal after it found she was not any more disadvantaged than someone who did not suffer from the disorder. Ms Modeste started working as a customer advisor for Barclays at the Glasgow office, Scotland, in July 2017 where she was doing 'extremely well' and won awards for her performance.
She would typically answer 50 calls a day from the bank's 'Premier' customers. According to Barclays' website, these customers 'must have a gross annual income of at least £75,000' in their current account or 'have at least £100,000 in Barclays savings or investment products'.
Just six months into the job, Ms Modeste answered a call from a customer of a sexual nature, the panel heard. The hearing, held in Glasgow, was told she raised it with the team and the customer was warned his account would be closed if he behaved like this again.
He then did call again and his account was shut. The tribunal heard he is no longer a Barclays customer. During an informal conversation in July 2018, the panel heard Ms Modeste told her line manager she had suffered bereavements but did not mention any other trauma or PTSD.
Then in October 2018 - nine months after the first call - she received another call from a someone who spoke in a 'strange way', leaving Ms Modeste 'uncomfortable'. The panel was told this caller was not a Barclays customer and had withheld their number.
Ms Modeste was given time away from the phones, but later that month the same caller managed to get through and Ms Modeste once again referred the matter to her line manager. The tribunal was told adjustments were made and Ms Modeste was referred to occupational health and counselling.
As time passed, she grew 'more and more upset', yet she did not reveal anything about her past which might be relevant, the panel heard. The tribunal was told 'inappropriate calls of a sexualised nature were extremely rare' with Ms Modeste being 'extremely unlucky' to receive three.
The tribunal heard the occupational health report found she suffered from 'low mood, tearfulness, disturbed sleep pattern and concentration'. But the report concluded she would be able to return to work on a phased basis in a matter of weeks and did not diagnose her with PTSD.
Ms Modeste then raised a grievance, complaining about how Barclays had dealt with the calls and referred to sleep disturbance as a result of 'flashes from past experiences'. Then in a further email, the panel heard Ms Modeste said the calls were 'indicative of a complex traumatic stress reaction' which appeared to be rooted in 'traumatic events she had been subject to during childhood/adolescence'.
Ms Modeste never returned to work after going off sick and resigned in March 2019 before making claims for indirect disability discrimination and reasonable adjustments at the tribunal. Dismissing her claims, Employment Judge Mark Whitcombe found that Barclays could not have done anything more to prevent her from receiving sexualised calls.
Judge Whitcombe concluded: "[Ms Modeste] has not proved on the balance of probabilities that the disadvantage she suffered, though undoubtedly very real and genuine, was any greater than the disadvantage suffered or likely to be suffered by people who did not have PTSD.
"We observe that the calls were not merely unpleasant, on the face of it they were quite possibly the sort of calls which would be likely to make any call handler, including those without PTSD, upset, discomfited, distressed and anxious."
