‘Being aligned with his personality is insulting,' says U.K. tribunal
An employee in the U.K. has received close to £30,000 in damages after a colleague’s comparison between her and Star Wars antagonist Darth Vader was found to have caused her significant distress, according to a UK employment tribunal.
In a case reported by The Guardian, the Croydon employment tribunal determined that likening someone to the sci-fi villain, even as part of a workplace activity, amounts to a “detriment” — a legal designation for harm experienced in the workplace.
Employment Judge Kathryn Ramsden emphasized the damaging nature of the association, stating, “Darth Vader is a legendary villain of the Star Wars series, and being aligned with his personality is insulting.”
The judgment clarified that such characterizations can be both “insulting” and “upsetting” for the individual on the receiving end.
The complaint was brought forward by Lorna Rooke, a training and practice supervisor with National Health Service (NHS) Blood and Transplant, who began her career with the service in 2003.
The dispute arose during an August 2021 team-building session involving a Star Wars-themed Myers-Briggs-style personality quiz, according to The Guardian.
Rooke was temporarily away from the session when a colleague, Amanda Harber, completed the personality assessment on her behalf. Harber later announced to the group that Rooke shared a type with Darth Vader, whose in-universe persona includes traits like domination and a reliance on the “dark side” of the Force, said the report.
While the fictional Sith Lord is portrayed in the quiz as a “very focused individual” capable of uniting teams, the tribunal noted that this particular comparison, mirrored Harber’s personal view of Rooke — and understandably caused offense.
As The Guardian further reported, Rooke testified that the experience made her feel isolated and contributed to her decision to resign the following month. However, the tribunal did not uphold her claim that the Darth Vader episode was the direct cause of her departure.
Still, Rooke’s legal action succeeded in part. The tribunal upheld her claim that the incident constituted a workplace detriment following a protected disclosure, although it rejected her complaints relating to unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and the employer’s alleged failure to make reasonable adjustments.
She was awarded £28,989 in compensation.
