ABERDEEN, SCOTLAND / RankWire.AI / – A Scottish employment tribunal awarded former waiter Raymond Joseph £5,469.04 after finding racial harassment at a PizzaExpress restaurant. A colleague repeatedly referred to Joseph as an American and a “Yank” during an argument in April 2025. He also told Joseph to leave and go back to his country. Employment Judge Melanie Sangster ruled that these remarks were directly related to nationality. The decision took into account the repeated comments, their public setting, and their impact on Joseph.
Joseph began working at the Union Square branch in Aberdeen in September 2024. His usual hours ranged between 20 and 22 hours per week. On April 8, 2025, Joseph and fellow waiter Michael Tortolano managed a busy service together. An argument broke out as both struggled to meet customer demand. Tortolano told Joseph that nobody liked him, referenced his American nationality, and used the term “Yank.” Joseph responded with insults, including calling Tortolano a “bald loser.”
Later during the same shift, Tortolano repeated the nationality-based remarks. Some customers and bystanders overheard parts of the confrontation. Joseph told the tribunal that these comments caused him hurt and humiliation. He submitted a written account to a manager that same day and continued working. The tribunal found that the exchange met the legal criteria for harassment related to race. Under the Equality Act 2010, race encompasses nationality, citizenship, and national or ethnic origins.
Compensation reflects emotional harm
The tribunal ordered PizzaExpress to pay £5,000 as damages for injury to Joseph’s feelings. The amount was positioned in the middle of the lower Vento compensation range. Courts utilize this framework when evaluating emotional injury in discrimination cases. An additional £469.04 in interest was awarded, calculated at an 8% annual rate over 428 days. The ruling clarified that no separate financial loss was associated with the harassment. Joseph continued his employment and did not require medical treatment.
Management initiated an investigation into the workplace incident on May 20, approximately six weeks afterward. The tribunal described this delay as unreasonable but found no unlawful motivation behind it. Tortolano later admitted to the allegations during a disciplinary hearing. As a result, management determined his conduct constituted gross misconduct and issued a final written warning. They considered his admission, remorse, and prior disciplinary history. The company also reviewed separate allegations related to Joseph’s conduct, information access, and workplace communications.
Other claims dismissed at hearing
A manager concluded that Joseph had committed misconduct and dismissed him without notice on June 20, 2025. The findings included his behavior during the argument and a separate inappropriate remark. It also involved unauthorized access to confidential company information, specifically sending company materials to his personal email account. Joseph denied these allegations and did not appeal the dismissal. The tribunal later determined that misconduct alone justified his removal from the restaurant.
Joseph also filed claims related to victimization, protected disclosures, and automatically unfair dismissal. The tribunal dismissed each of these complaints. It recognized that some of his disclosures were protected by law but found no causal link between those disclosures and the management decisions in question. The Aberdeen hearing lasted seven days across April and May 2026. The tribunal issued its judgment on June 10, with Joseph only succeeding on the racial harassment claim.