An agency support worker who was accused of inappropriately touching a vulnerable teenage girl during a restraint at a Lancashire children's home has won an employment tribunal claim for sex discrimination.
Employment Judge McTigue found that Olushola Akinyemi was treated less favourably than a female colleague following an incident at Thornton Children's Home in August 2024 because he was male.
However, the tribunal dismissed his separate claim of race discrimination.
The hearing was told that Mr Akinyemi worked nights as a "Waking Watch Support Worker" for Lancashire County Council's children's residential services through an agency.
On August 4, 2024, staff at Thornton Children's Home were dealing with a teenage girl who had previously been the victim of child sexual exploitation and had become aggressive towards workers.
During a restraint, the young person accused both Mr Akinyemi and fellow agency worker Emma Smith of inappropriate touching.
Evidence heard by the tribunal showed the girl claimed Ms Smith had touched her breast after the youngster pushed herself forward during the restraint, while she alleged Mr Akinyemi had touched her between the legs and put his hands up her shorts.
After reviewing witness evidence from staff present, the tribunal found neither allegation was true.
Judge McTigue concluded Mr Akinyemi had not placed his hands up the girl's shorts and had simply attempted to protect himself after she tried to kick him in the testicles.
The judgment states: "I find that the claimant did not grab the young person's leg or put his hands up her shorts. He simply pushed her leg away as she kicked out at him."
It also found the restraint had been "proportionate and reasonable" and there had been "no inappropriate conduct on behalf of any of the staff".
Despite that, the girl became distressed and continued to accuse Mr Akinyemi, while accepting comfort from Ms Smith.
The tribunal heard that, because of the allegation, managers sent Mr Akinyemi home and referred the matter to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) and police.
He was subsequently unable to work for Lancashire County Council while investigations continued and his agency informally suspended him without pay.
Ms Smith, by contrast, was allowed to continue working and was not referred to LADO.
The tribunal found there was no material difference between the actions of the two workers during the restraint and ruled that Ms Smith was a valid comparator.
Judge McTigue said the key distinction was the girl's reaction to Mr Akinyemi because he was male.
The judgment noted the young person had previously been subjected to child sexual exploitation by men and had been re-traumatised by the contact during the restraint.
The tribunal found Lancashire County Council knew of her background and the risk she could react differently to male staff.
Read more
Accrington murderer sentenced to life with minimum term of 16 years and 5 days
RECAP - updates as murderer Muhammad Haarith sentenced to 16 years and 5 days
Burnley man admits sending naked images to child and making 70 indecent images
It concluded that the decision to send Mr Akinyemi home and subsequently refer him to LADO was "because of" his sex.
Judge McTigue said: "The traumatic reaction was inseparable from the fact the claimant was male.
"The causal link between the young person's reaction and the claimant's sex was sufficiently close for his treatment, in being sent home, to be a consequence of his sex."
The tribunal reached the same conclusion regarding the referral to LADO, finding that Mr Akinyemi's sex had materially influenced the decision.
However, the judge rejected claims that race played any part in the treatment he received.
The judgment states: "There is nothing within the evidence that I have seen or heard that demonstrates direct race discrimination."
Mr Akinyemi's sex discrimination claim succeeded, while his race discrimination claim was dismissed.
A separate remedies hearing is expected to determine any compensation due to Mr Akinyemi.
Share