Case highlights the challenges of working in a multi-generational workforce

The case of Ms Ritchie v Goom Electrical highlights the challenges of managing a multi-generational workforce (or, frankly, simply managing the fact that people have different approaches to work).

Ms Ritchie was in her mid-60s when she started working in administration for the electrical company. Ms Ritchie claimed that a noisy, boisterous office amounted to age discrimination and harassment. The Tribunal disagreed, finding that Ms Ritchie's perception of the environment was not reasonable. In this article, we outline the key facts, judgment and practical tips for employers to take as a result.

The facts

Ms Ritchie, the claimant, was employed by Goom Electrical ("Goom") from 17 December 2020 until 27 September 2022. In her role as a Booking Administrator, she was required to call tenants to arrange electrical testing visits by engineers. Ms Ritchie was 66 years old when she started employment with Goom and was the oldest person in the workplace. The majority of other staff in her role were in their 20s and 30s.

In around September 2021, Ms Ritchie told her manager that she found the office to be a "very noisy environment" and distracting. She also reported that colleagues were engaging in personal conversations in the office when they ought to be working and said that she had difficulties watching such time wasting.

In the subsequent months, Ms Ritchie continued to raise concerns related to her colleagues. This included that they had phones on their desks and were frequently getting up from their desks. Ms Ritchie also requested to work from home during this time, claiming that tenants could hear background office noise and that she found this to be embarrassing. In their responses to her concerns, Ms Ritchie's managers advised her to focus on achieving her performance targets rather than being too concerned with her colleagues.

In August 2022, Ms Ritchie raised a grievance to Goom's HR manager, outlining her concerns with the noise in the office and "unmanageable" performance targets. Shortly after this, she went on sick leave. A grievance hearing meeting, and investigation, took place in the following month.

Before receiving the grievance outcome letter, Ms Ritchie asked if she could move to another role. Upon hearing that another position was no longer available, Ms Ritchie resigned.

The claimant brought claims of age discrimination and harassment, breach of contract, whistleblowing detriment, whistleblowing dismissal and some extraneous claims. We focus on the age discrimination elements in this article.  

The judgment

The Tribunal did not uphold any of Ms Ritchie's claims.

According to the Tribunal, Ms Ritchie's perception of the noisy and disruptive behaviour as amounting to harassment was not reasonable. While Ms Ritchie endeavoured to remain professional, the Tribunal concluded that "her projection of this standard to all those with whom she worked was not reasonable and resulted in her having unreasonable feelings of indignation about their behaviour when she did not have justifiable reason to do so."

In respect of the grievance outcome letter, the Tribunal noted that the Claimant may have been disappointed by its content, but this was not included to intimidate, humiliate or belittle Ms Ritchie. Rather, it was to provide her with the evidence upon which the decision was made. In respect of Ms Ritchie's performance targets, the Tribunal also found no evidence of her suffering any personal disadvantage for failing to hit the targets and they were not discriminatory based on age.

Practical tips

While Ms Ritchie's claims were ultimately unsuccessful, the case highlights some of the challenges with managing a multi-generational workforce (or simply different personalities and/or approaches to work). This includes differing norms around what is “professional conduct” or “appropriate behaviour” (e.g. chatting/socialising), differing physical or sensory tolerance, varying capacities to absorb increased workloads or KPIs, and communication gaps - younger and older staff may have different expectations of feedback, management style and workplace culture.