Zakaria Kioua, a 37-year-old Muslim man, stood up to discrimination from his employer, Lainston House. He won a landmark victory against their decision when he was refused a raffle prize due to his religious beliefs in an employment tribunal. In an important ruling, the tribunal held that his harassment claim on the grounds of religion or belief was well founded. This choice followed an episode at a team party in January 2017.
Kioua is originally from Algeria, where he first trained as a veterinarian. Upon arrival in the UK, he worked his way up, first as a linen porter. At the staff holiday party, he bought a raffle ticket and won a high-end bottle of Cognac. He did not attend the event on the day the prize was drawn.
Once Kioua found out that he had won, one of the Yi’s staff members immediately proposed an interesting idea. They imagined Kioua getting chocolates instead of Cognac because he doesn’t drink alcohol for religious reasons. Providing Kioua Cognac, the hotel’s manager Gaius Wyncoll said, would amount to “like giving nuts to somebody with a nut allergy.” He pointed out just how ridiculous a gesture like this would be. This sort of analogy rubbed Kioua the wrong way.
Kioua firmly rejected Wyncoll’s explanation, stating, “It’s different. They don’t want that prize to be going to me and they’ve used my religion to get what they want … I felt really ignored and humiliated and not cared about.” His sentiments echo a widespread worry among people of faith about the extent to which their beliefs will be honored in the workplace.
Kioua, feeling injured and excluded from this experience, filed a number of discrimination claims against Lainston House in April 2019. The tribunal ultimately found that the hotel’s actions were discriminatory and failed to adequately consider Kioua’s beliefs.
The tribunal panel addressed the comparison made by Wyncoll, emphasizing that “A nut allergy is an illness, a life-threatening illness. It is not an acceptable point of comparison. It minimises the importance of Mr Kioua’s beliefs and practices.”
This ruling serves as a reminder to employers of the need to be sensitive to the wide-ranging beliefs of employees. This logic extends to the need to value every staff member with dignity and respect.