The woman told the tribunal she thought her boss wanted a sexual relationship. Photo / Supplied
The woman told the tribunal she thought her boss wanted a sexual relationship. Photo / Supplied
An IT worker in the United Kingdom sued her boss for sexual harassment after he inserted ‘xx’ in parts of an email where he required more information that she understood to mean kisses.
In the same email, Karina Gasparova claimed her boss Aleksander Goulandris’ use of question marks was codefor her “to engage in sexual acts”.
A London employment tribunal heard Gasparova assumed Goulandris was trying to “chat her up” whilst on a work call, running his hands through his hair and “staring” at her.
A number of incidents occurred where Gasparova found her boss acting sinister, thinking he renamed a file with his initials AJG to mean “A Jumbo Genital,” the Daily Telegraph reported.
Gasparova eventually took essDOCS - a paperless documents firm - to the tribunal claiming sexual harassment, discrimination and unfair dismissal. But after submitting a detailed grievance against Goulandris, the co-head and former chief executive, she resigned from her job when all of her sexual harassment allegations were rejected.
Aleksander Goulandris renamed a file with his initials, AJG, which Karina Gasparova said was an acronym for 'A Jumbo Genital'. Photo / YouTube
Gasparova told the tribunal, she thought her boss wanted a sexual relationship, so mistreated her by shouting at her because she had “rejected his advances”.
In November 2019, Gasparova claimed Goulandris touched her leg with his under a table and “stared at her”, leaving her feeling “anxious and uncomfortable”.
The panel also heard he would undermine her during meetings with clients and remove key elements of work from her, these claims were rejected.
A judge-led panel threw out the case, ruling she had a “skewed perception of everyday events” and misread “innocuous” interactions.
The employee was ordered to pay $10,000 to essDOCS in costs for failing to follow through with tribunal procedures in time.
Employment Judge Emma Burns stated: “Our primary reasons for rejecting her account of events were that we considered her perception of everyday events was skewed.
“She demonstrated a tendency to make extraordinary allegations without evidence and she contradicted herself in a way that could not be attributable to a fallible memory.
”Ms Gasparova interpreted entirely innocent work-related conduct, some of it accidental, by Mr Goulandris as having a sinister intent.”
The tribunal also heard Gasparova tried to gather support from fellow colleagues asking if Goulandris had ever made sexual advances like “leering, winking and touching”.
Not one person replied to her.
The tribunal rejected her claims of direct sexual harassment, discrimination and unfair dismissal.
