Complainant Amy Reeves said the judicial system had 'failed' her after her discrimination claim was shot down

Describing someone as "coloured" is not racist, an employment judge has ruled.

A tribunal has concluded that even if the term was considered to be "old-fashioned", it was not racist to describe someone of an ethnic minority background if used as a "one-off comment".

Mixed-heritage admin worker Amy Reeves heard a colleague describe two people as "coloured" while working in an office.

She claimed she was the victim of discrimination and racial harassment as a result of the remarks.

But the tribunal found the colleague did "not intend" for the term to be offensive and determined Ms Reeves to not have been subjected to any form of harassment.

The tribunal also said it was not reasonable for her to be upset by the use of the term, but conceded it could be "offensive".

Ms Reeves, who is of British and Jamaican heritage, was employed by construction and housing company Kier Ltd in Sheffield, Yorkshire, working as a commercial administrator in November 2024.

On her first day at the job, one tenant had been described as a "little old black lady", she said.

She then sent a message to someone the next day, saying: "There were some discriminatory comments in the office yesterday that bothered me and I'm not really sure how to approach it, I'm not upset as I think people just need to be educated better (it's a 100 per cent white British office)."

In March 2025, Ms Reeves said the project manager of the company, Wayne Pashley, had described a pair of women outside the office as "two coloured ladies outside".

She said Mr Pashley was "visibly startled" as he noticed she could see him.

Ms Reeves then reported the usage of the term to her manager, saying that "racial discrimination" was something she was "struggling with".

LATEST FROM YORKSHIRE:

She said: "Site staff have said 'two coloured ladies', 'old black ladies' and quite frequently laughed at non-English last names.

"It's making me really uncomfortable and out of place, I'm wondering if you could address these issues? Let me know your thoughts."

The manager did offer to intervene, but she told him not to because things had been settled at that point.

She did note, however, that she personally preferred to not describe not use the term "black" even if it was used purely descriptively.

Ms Reeves said she continued to experience "'discriminatory behaviour, microaggressions, and a pattern of exclusion" which led her to file a grievance with the company in May 2025, asking to work 100 per cent remotely as it was dealt with.

She left sick with stress, eventually resigning from the company in July, citing a failure to "protect her from discrimination".

Her complaints of harassment related to race, victimisation and direct race discrimination were all dismissed by Employment Judge Kirsty Ayre.

The judge accepting that Ms Reeves was upset by the remarks, said: "We find, however, that in all the circumstances, it was not reasonable for the comment to have that effect.

"It was a one off comment, not directed at [Ms Reeves] and used to describe two people."

Speaking after the decision, Ms Reeves said she felt "baffled", adding that the "judicial system severely failed me on that day".