Gayle Force – Sexist comments won’t simply blow over

Wednesday 6 January 2016

A recent post match interview saw West Indian cricketer star Chris Gayle make sexist comments to Mel McLaughlin, a Network Ten sports reporter.

After his impressive performance in the game, Gayle was asked about his big-hitting style to which he replied “To see your eyes for the first time is nice. Hopefully we can have a drink afterwards. Don’t blush baby”.

Gayle later made comments regarding it as a joke and as something he didn’t mean offence by. But debate continues as to when a joke crosses the line into harassment. As a result of his comments Gayle faced an $10,000 ($7,200; £4,900) fine. The fine will be donated to a breast cancer charity, the McGrath Foundation.

The Equality Act 2010 

Under the laws of England and Wales, S.26 prescribes all legislative avenues where harassment can occur. S26 reads that any behaviour that the conduct ‘has the purpose or effect of violating another’s dignity, or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for another’ are classed as harassment. The ultimate decision lies with Employment Tribunals which has left debate as to what statements breach the realms of jokes or ‘banter’ within the workplace.

Previous harassment cases

Comparisons can be made to the outbursts of Andy Gray and Richard Keys as well as Malky Mackay with the comments they made. Interestingly the Football Association in regards to Mackay found not to take the case further due to the communications having a legitimate expectation of privacy. This stems from the fact communications were made on private telephones rather than in the public presence such as in the case of Gayle and previously with the Sky Sports pundits.

This is somewhat opposite to the action taken by Sky Sports with regards to Andy Gray and Richard Keys. Although it was only Gray who was formally dismissed the resignation of Keys had similar reasoning. The outburst of the West Indian international does seem to mirror that what occurred at Sky Sports but can be clearly seen to have been handled in differently.

Employers must have regard to all communications that can occur during the course of employment. Although the FA has been seen to highlight privacy issues within their policy this cannot be seen as protection for employers when clear discrimination has occurred. Public outbursts as seen with Gayle and at Sky Sports have found different resolutions but both are grounded in potential pitfalls where harassment can occur during the course of work.

Questions will be asked if a fine does go far enough to deter such behaviour occurring in the workplace. Drawing the comparison with Andy Gray and Richard Keys, both no longer work at Sky Sports as a result of their comments. Has the conduct of both the Australian Cricket Board and The Melbourne Renegades been sufficient to prevent cases like this occurring in the future?

Looking forward to a harassment free working environment

What is clear is how employers must take proactive measures to protect employees and try to pre-empt potential claims of this nature. Equal opportunities and anti-harassment policies must be up to date and enforceable in the workplace. A case like this gives a stark reminder to employers to ensure their policies and procedures are up to date.