Featured Image Credit: unknown
Topics: UK News
James Moorhouse
A senior firefighter with more than 27 years of service lost his unfair dismissal case after allowing colleagues to use the word 'fireman'.
Simon Bailey was issued with a final written warning in July 2023 after his colleague Sasha Acheson complained about the behaviour of her peers two years prior.
It was claimed that Bailey had overseen an 'openly sexist' workplace, which included derogatory comments about women, as well as claims from Bailey himself that he and Ms Acheson had bonded after 'watching porn' together.
Mr Bailey ended up resigning in September 2023, after a misconduct panel largely upheld Ms Acheson's complaints, imposing what he thought were disproportionate sanctions.
Advert
Avon Fire and Rescue, where they both worked, admitted to 'persistent sexual derogatory and offensive comments' towards or about women, which included regular use of the term 'fireman'.
Despite 'firefighter' being commonplace since the late 1980s, Mr Bailey suggested that the term fireman is 'embedded, not only in the fire service, but in society generally'.
He added: "I have spent 25 years in AF&RS, and I joined just after the transition from fireman to firefighter had taken place. Yet, since joining, the term 'fireman' has been endemic."
However, he did later accept 'in hindsight' that the term had the 'potential to cause offence', but employment judge Richard Woodhead instead focused on the jokes that were consistently used in the station.
These jokes included asking who was doing the dishes, or suggesting that Ms Acheson (a former England rugby player), should have been in the kitchen rather than the gym.
He said: "[Mr Bailey] did not challenge the use of this term when he heard it.
"I do not consider it a serious matter that the term 'Fireman' continued to be used on occasion on [Mr Bailey's] watch.
"As some of those interviewed said, it might be used by accident. I can see nothing problematic about the term being used to refer to a male firefighter."
However, Mr Woodhead ultimately concluded that the fire service acted reasonably, the disciplinary process was fair, and Mr Bailey was not constructively dismissed, in the report that was published on 25 November.
He added: "It was not sustainable for [Mr Bailey] to have asserted that he did not hear demeaning comments or that language used on his watch was respectful when it is clear that jokes that were demeaning and stereotyped women were made on the Watch for which he was responsible.
"It is not probable that, when he conceded that there were jokey comments that were not squeaky clean, [Mr Bailey] was not referring to the jokes that played on old fashioned stereotypes based on sex, as recorded in Mrs Martin's report and as reported by members of his watch.
"[Mr Bailey] clearly knew that there was such a culture.
"It is clear to me that, in imposing the sanction that it did on [Mr Bailey], the Fire Service did not act in a way calculated to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence with [Mr Bailey]."