Bridgette Peters, a black chef previously employed at L’Eto, a high-end restaurant in Notting Hill, London, faced dismissal after just one week of employment. Peters alleged that her white colleagues discriminated against her because she is Black. So she sued the restaurant over this blatant racial discrimination.
Peters started her culinary apprenticeship as a chef de partie on August 23, 2022. She told investigators she felt targeted by the kitchen’s culture of criticism. As Peters observed, her typically well-educated colleagues did not remember to include the niceties in their communication—like “please”—when they needed something. The trouble started, though, when she told sous chef Peter Bartczak to put “please” in his demands. He, inappropriately and allegedly, brushed her request aside.
The situation escalated even more when Peters was unwilling to flatten bread on the orders of another co-worker, Nishma Gurung. Peters described Gurung as “the rudest person” she’d ever encountered. She was upset by what she perceived to be the everyday irritability of a working colleague. This conflict, along with Peters’ insistence on polite communication, raised concerns among L’Eto’s management regarding her ability to integrate into the team.
The full Employment tribunal, led by Employment Judge Woodhead, considered Peters’ claims at a hearing earlier this month. The tribunal listened to expert testimonies and examined evidence provided by both the complainant and respondent. In the end, Judge Woodhead found for L’Eto, arguing that the combative style of communication in a restaurant was not “nasty”.
“We accept that in that work environment that was not rudeness, it was a matter of practicality,” – Employment Judge Woodhead
Judge Woodhead further elaborated on the nature of communication within the culinary industry, noting it often adopts “a more efficient, direct, and intense communication style.” Nonetheless, the tribunal accepted this approach as typical for all high-end hospitality establishments and not special to L’Eto.
Despite Peters’ claims of differential treatment based on race, the tribunal’s decision underlined that the expectations for communication within the kitchen did not align with her perceptions of politeness. L’Eto’s management expressed misgivings about Peters’ fit with the team. They thought these problems stemmed from her unwillingness to adjust to their well-defined communication culture.