Calling a colleague “old” due to their struggles with computer skills does not automatically amount to age discrimination, an employment tribunal has ruled.
The case involved 39-year-old Farah Janjua, who brought claims against her former employer, Harvey Jones Ltd, after a younger manager told her that her lack of IT skills was “because you’re old.” Ms Janjua argued that the remark, made by a colleague in his late 20s, constituted unlawful age discrimination.
Ms Janjua joined the Harvey Jones kitchen showroom in Marlow in July 2022 as a sales designer. The tribunal heard that during one incident, sales manager Nawaz Salauddin showed her how to attach documents using a computer mouse. When she admitted she was unfamiliar with the function, he reportedly responded: “Cos you’re old.”
Ms Janjua complained about the remark, claiming it was ageist, and cited a separate incident in which a regional manager appeared “disgusted” upon learning her age. She was dismissed from her role in December 2022 following the end of her probation period and subsequently filed legal proceedings. Alongside age discrimination, her claims included allegations of race and sex discrimination, sexual harassment, harassment related to sex, and victimisation.
The Employment Tribunal sitting in Reading rejected all her claims. Judge Naomi Shastri-Hurst said the tribunal accepted that the comment had been made, but it did not meet the legal threshold for age discrimination.
“We find that a lack of technical knowledge is not infrequently deemed, rightly or wrongly, to be connected to age,” the judge said. “On the balance of probabilities, we accept that this conversation took place as suggested.”
The ruling noted that Mr Salauddin would have made the same comment to any colleague older than him, rather than targeting Ms Janjua specifically because she was 39. “In light of the evidence we have as to his character and behaviour, in terms of his desire to assert his authority, we find that he would have said this to anyone older than him,” Judge Shastri-Hurst added.
All other claims filed by Ms Janjua were also dismissed. The judge concluded: “We reject the claim of age discrimination in its entirety.”
The decision highlights how employment tribunals distinguish between inappropriate or poorly judged workplace comments and actions that meet the legal definition of discrimination. While comments like Mr Salauddin’s may be offensive or unprofessional, they do not automatically constitute unlawful behaviour under employment law unless there is clear evidence of discriminatory intent.
The case underscores the importance for employees and employers alike to understand the difference between casual remarks and legally actionable discrimination, and it serves as a reminder that tribunals assess the context and motivation behind workplace interactions.
