Alan presents an extract from a complicated UK case – he is focussed on a particular passing comment rather than a binding ruling. In this comment, the aggrieved person complained that a alleged perpetrator labelled him, ‘bald.’ The defendant viewed this as discriminatory and a form of sexual harassment.
While reflecting on workplace harassment by teasing others about their appearance, culture, sex, gender affiliation, or accent, the crew, Alan and Trajce, can’t help but make fun of Sara and her American accent. “They’re not confident and BOLD, they are BALD!” exclaims Trajce.
They descend into discussions about man-boobs, sexually suggestive body parts cross cultures—like wrists and earlobes, and hairiness versus baldness “Follically challenged!” chimes Trajce.
Sara talks about the trend in legal cases following contemporary issues, where the pendulum swings based on what is making news and the regulator’s focus. She also discusses the messiness of determining prejuidical treatment in the workplace when legal pundits must dissect both intention of harm by the perpetrator and perception of harm by a defendant.
For more on sexual harassment and prejudicial concerns, listen to:
Season 7, Episode 5 – Tickle versus Giggle for Girls and Safety on the Footy Field
Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] FCA 960
Season 9, Episode 3 – “Top o’ the morning to ya!”