A saleswoman from Norfolk, England, took legal action after discovering that her male colleagues had placed bets on who would sleep with her first.
Molly Craigie had just joined home improvement company East Anglia Home Improvements in 2022 when the bet was made.
Craigie told an employment tribunal that the men’s behavior amounted to a “s*x sweepstake” and that they had made a “wager” on who would be the first to “bed” her.
Highlights
- A Norfolk saleswoman sued after male colleagues placed bets on who would sleep with her first at East Anglia Home Improvements.
- The woman said she was s*xualized and told to "flirt and flaunt herself" with customers, using s*x for sales,
- Judge Rebecca Peer ruled the wager was s*xual harassment.
The woman, who was in her early twenties at the time of the incident, claimed that she was “s*xualized and singled out” because of her gender and accused managers of encouraging “locker room chat” at the company.
Image credits: Drazen/stock.adobe.com (Not the actual photo)
She further claimed she was told to “flirt and flaunt herself” with customers and to use “s*x to make sales.”
Craigie was allegedly told she'd been hired because “she would not intimidate elderly customers.”
Image credits: mollycraigie
Her role required visiting potential customers who had expressed interest in double glazing and other home improvement products, with the aim of persuading them to purchase the company’s products, as per The Daily Mail.
After joining the company, a co-worker warned Craigie that “two of my colleagues had placed a wager between themselves as to who would sleep with me first.” One of the men involved was allegedly a member of management.
The alleged inappropriate conduct took place at East Anglia Home Improvements
Image credits: makemeunique.co.uk/
Image credits: East Anglia Home Improvements
The saleswoman said the discovery of the alleged bet “stuck with me,” arguing, “Colleagues s*xualized me and singled me out, all down to my s*x.”
The bet was placed before her colleagues “got time to know me and realize I was in a long-term committed relationship,” she told the tribunal.
Judge Peer noted there was no evidence that Craigie had “directly confronted anyone about the wager or sought further information or even tried to ascertain whether the information given by [her colleague] was true.”
Still, the judge accepted parts of Craigie’s evidence and found it “likely” that the incident had unfolded as the woman described.
Craigie alleged that her colleagues told her to "flirt and flaunt herself" with potential clients
Image credits: Felicity Tai/Pexels (Not the actual photo)
Ultimately, Judge Peer ruled that she was entitled to £4,775 in unpaid holiday pay by her former employer.
It comes after a senior executive at Acas, the UK’s authority on workplace conduct, was fired for s*xual harassment after sending a “barrage” of inappropriate messages to young female colleagues, suggested “s*x bets,” and left a pair of women’s underwear on a female colleague’s desk.
Image credits: azwedo/Unsplash (Not the actual photo)
During the probe in 2021, the Deputy Chief Conciliator reportedly complained that the MeToo movement had “changed the rules” and “lowered the bar for s*xual harassment.”
After being fired for gross misconduct, Woods sued Acas for unfair dismissal. He won the case, as the government-funded body failed to follow its own rules during the dismissal procedure.
Judge Rebecca Peer ruled that the men’s behavior constituted s*xual harassment
Image credits: iamchamp/stock.adobe.com (Not the actual photo)
However, he didn’t receive compensation after an employment tribunal ruled that even if the process had been carried out correctly, he would still have been fired for gross misconduct.
An internal investigation found evidence to suggest Woods was “perceived as being very powerful and influential within Acas” and that he had “groomed” and “gaslighted” one woman who had “accepted his coercive, manipulating and threatening behavior at the time.”
There was also evidence indicating a “pattern of behavior” of him making “persistent” advances toward new, young female colleagues. Employees felt they couldn’t address his behavior because of his seniority and their being new to the organization, according to the judgement.
Netizens reacted to the judge's ruling and discussed the issue workplace s*xual harassment
