For advice and assistance on these issues, or related workplace training, please contact our expert HR and employment lawyers on 01332 226 155 or fill in the form below.
Recent research conducted by GQ|Littler, shows that the number of employment tribunal claims related to ‘workplace banter’ increased by 44% in the 12 months prior to May 2022.
31 August 2022
Insight
Employers often use ‘workplace banter’ as a defence to claims of harassment under section 26 Equality Act 2010.
Under section 26 of the Equality Act, a person harasses another if they engage in unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic (or which is of a sexual nature) which has the purpose or effect violating that person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. In that particular context, employers can argue that the conduct that is being complained about is harmless, jovial, consensual and/or fun.
When assessing whether the conduct of complained of constitutes harassment under the Equality Act, the Employment Tribunal will consider the claimant’s views on the conduct, together with the other relevant circumstances surrounding the conduct including whether it is reasonable for the claimant to have found the conduct offensive in light of the wider context of the overall culture of that particular workplace.
The ‘banter’ defence was used successfully in Evans -v- Xactly Corporation Ltd. Here, Mr Evans brought a claim for harassment related to his disability and race after comments were made about him being a “fat ginger pikey”.
The Employment Tribunal found that there was a wider culture of office banter which included teasing, that Mr Evans himself had engaged in this behaviour, referring to colleagues as “fat paddies” and that subsequently, the comments about Mr Evans could not reasonably have been said to have the effect of violating his dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
In contrast, there are numerous case law examples where the workplace banter defence has been unsuccessful. For example, in the case of Austin -v- Samuel Grant (North East) Ltd the Employment Tribunal found that Mr Austin had been harassed on the grounds of his sexual orientation when his colleagues referred to him as “homosexual” and “gay” because he had told them that he did not like football.
Similarly, in the case of Robson -v- Clarke’s Mechanical Ltd the employer tried to argue that calling somebody “half-dead Dave” because of his age was banter, which the Employment Tribunal were unimpressed with.
The cases above illustrate the danger of using banter as a defence to claims under the Equality Act in the workplace. This is important as employers can be vicariously liable for the actions of their employees.
The success of the ‘banter defence’ turns on the facts of each case and employers should take steps to ensure they are appropriately protected against claims under the Equality Act.
This may include:
Related Services
Understand employer rights when employees have second jobs, including contracts, working time, conflicts of interest and dismissal.
Read More
Download our probationary period resource pack to help prepare for the Employment Rights Act changes from January 2027.
Read More
Download expert guidance on UK trade union reforms and prepare your organisation for Employment Rights Act changes.
Read More
Employment law tips for employers managing absence, flexibility and inclusion during the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
Read More
Guidance for employers on managing workplace distraction, excessive phone use and digital overload at work.
Read More
Key April 2026 changes to trade union recognition rules and what employers should do ahead of wider reforms later this year.
Read More
Government consultation begins on NDA restrictions under the Employment Rights Act 2025, with changes expected from 2027.
Read More
Employers can voluntarily publish menopause and gender pay gap action plans from April 2026 ahead of the 2027 legal requirement.
Read More
Understand SSP 2026 updates, employer responsibilities, and common pitfalls to keep your business compliant and protect staff rights.
Read More
EAT confirms employers should assess redundancies forward-looking, not retrospectively, when deciding if collective consultation is needed.
Read More
Learn the 2026 National Minimum Wage rates, common employer pitfalls, and how to stay compliant with new Fair Work Agency rules.
Read More
ERA 2025 reforms take effect February 2026, changing industrial action rules, employee protections, and union obligations.
Read More