A firefighter sacked for allegedly making a racist monkey chant at a pedestrian has won his claim for unfair dismissal.
And in its findings, the employment tribunal has exposed a culture of bullying, laddish banter and sexist and racist comments in the island’s fire and rescue service.
Fire chiefs claimed the loud monkey noises and gestures were openly racist as they were aimed at a pedestrian who was walking along the pavement at the time.
But Mr Versluijs maintained that he had not even seen the pedestrian and his monkey noises were directed at the leading firefighter who was sitting in the front of the fire engine.
The leading firefighter was known as ’Macca’s Monkey’ by the crew of Blue Watch who cast him as the monkey to his organ grinder boss.
He had played up the monkey epithet using the word monkey and monkey emojis on the Blue Watch WhatsApp pages.
The tribunal concluded there was no racist intent and Mr Versluijs had been unfairly dismissed for being a whistleblower who had raised concerns over staffing issues.
It said it was unwarranted and unfair for the complainant to be found guilty of gross misconduct and the investigation was not handled fairly.
In a warning given at the start of its ruling, the tribunal notes: ’Before anyone jumps to a quick conclusion that this tribunal condones what some would consider racist behaviour, this complex decision should be read as a whole.’
Evidence was heard over five days and this included claims of bullying, banter and the use of sexist and racist comments by fire service personnel.
Witnesses spoke of a culture in the fire service which involved name-calling, pranks and inappropriate comments which were racist or sexist.
But the tribunal heard that dark humour was part of the release mechanism from the dangers of the firefighters’ job.
One former sub-officer said: ’This was all part of assisting with the stresses and strains of the job.
’Firefighters saw and had to deal with a number of horrific incidents and everyone had their own way of how to cope with it.’
Use of nicknames was prevalent, including ’Scummer’, ’Ugly’ and ’Benny the Blade’. These nicknames were not intended to offend, witnesses claimed.
The tribunal heard evidence of racist and sexist comments being used, including a derogatory reference to people from South East Asia in a Blue Watch WhatsApp message. One very senior officer was said to have remarked: ’Why would a P*k* join when they can make more money in their corner shops?’
A retired station officer recalled a sexist incident in which a female firefighter was told by a male colleague while attending a barn fire that she must be ’bursting for a pee’ and was then pressed in her bladder area twice.
Mr Versluijs said on several occasions he had heard junior officers and other Watch members comment to female firefighters that they should: ’Get in the kitchen where you belong.’
He also recalled seeing a training dummy being hung up on a hangman’s noose with a note saying this would be a certain firefighter after not getting promotion.
Mr Versluijs told the tribunal that some of the banter was childish and that, to others outside of the service, would probably seem inappropriate and at times highly offensive.
He considered that his monkey chants were no different to other incidents involving senior staff involving general banter, nicknames and pranks which were daily occurrences.
The complainant said the monkey chant incident had been ’blown out of all proportion’ and he had been victimised because of the disclosures and grievances.
He had urged the chief fire officer to meet with Blue Watch, claiming some firefighters were looking for new jobs, some fire engines were going out with inexperienced crews and the fire service was ’running by the seat of its pants’.
The tribunal said it was satisfied that the principal reason for the dismissal was because of protected disclosures made by the complainant.
It said it was in no doubt that Mr Versluijs made a whistleblowing complaint in early February 2018 and he had genuine concerns about his own welfare and that of others due to what he saw as low morale and succession issues.
Despite his request for anonymity, the chief fire officer had named the complainant as the whistleblower and from them on he became a ’marked man’.
The parties will need to return to the tribunal for a hearing on what remedy should follow.