A FEMALE firearms office experienced "horrific" workplace culture in an armed policing unit within Police Scotland, an employment tribunal has found.
It accepted evidence of an “absolute boys’ club” in the armed response vehicles unit in the east of Scotland after former officer Rhona Malone raised the tribunal against the force.
She alleged sex discrimination and victimisation. Her victimisation claims succeeded but the discrimination claim was dismissed.
Malone’s solicitor, Margaret Gribbon, said: “The employment tribunal upheld my client’s claims that Police Scotland victimised her over a lengthy period after she complained about an inspector’s overtly sexist email.
"The employment tribunal’s findings lay bare the misogynistic attitudes and culture within armed policing and the hostile treatment police officers face when they try to call it out.”
READ MORE: Police Scotland launch officer verification checks in wake of Sarah Everard murder
Malone claimed Police Scotland had offered her a payout if she signed a non-disclosure agreement. She said she was “absolutely delighted at finally obtaining justice”.
She told The Sun: “I didn’t want to leave my job, there was no reason for this, it was completely unnecessary.
“I didn’t need to go to court for any of this, but they made it so difficult. They put me and my family through absolute hell and torture, for years I was in limbo.
“As a police officer I stood up for people’s rights, I expected the same in return.”
The tribunal also found that Malone was an "entirely credible and reliable witness", but the evidence of her former superior, Insp Keith Warhurst, was "contradictory, confusing and ultimately incredible".
He copied Malone in on an email in January 2018 saying two female firearms officers should not be deployed together when there were sufficient male staff on duty, referring to “the obvious differences in physical capacity” and suggesting this made “more sense from a search, balance of testosterone perspective”.
But the tribunal found that Warhurst’s instruction was not carried out, with staff told it did not represent the views of senior management and, as a result of this it dismissed Malone’s direct discrimination claim.
Police Scotland apologised to Malone and said it would address the issues raised in the judgement "as a matter of urgency".
In its judgement, the tribunal accepted evidence that there was an "absolute boys' club culture" within the ARV which was "horrific". It also found:
- Sgt Rachel Coates, a former colleague of Malone, was told by the chief firearms instructor that women should not become AFOs "because they menstruated and that affected their temperament".
- When Sgt Coates asked if women AFOs could wear trousers and a top, rather than a one-piece, so it would be easier to go to the toilet, the chief firearms instructor swore at her.
- Insp Warhurst posted images of topless women to a WhatsApp group of male sergeants within the Fettes Team 1. A colleague messaged him and told him it was inappropriate.
- Another former colleague of Malone overheard Insp Warhust calling one of the female Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (Pirc) agents "a wee lassie".
- Sgt Coates and another colleague, Constable Zara Taylor, left the ARV division as they were "not confident that the sexist culture...was going to change and felt their sex was always going to be a barrier to promotion".
Malone told the Guardian she has now been approached by many other female officers who had faced similar experiences. “The unconscious bias in Police Scotland is so deep that they don’t even realise. Misogynist banter is nurtured and no one steps in to say this is wrong. So that poisonous culture is just going to grow.”
She said Police Scotland are "promoting the wrong people, and those who speak up are made to look like they are the problem".
Police Scotland has been approached for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel