Health Care Worker Awarded £1,400 for Harassment Claim

Complaints included a colleague repeatedly calling her 'auntie'

St. Bernard's Hospital

April 6, 2026

A healthcare assistant working in West London NHS Trust’s Women’s Forensic Services in Southall has been awarded just over £1,400 after an employment tribunal ruled she was subjected to age- and sex-based harassment by a colleague who repeatedly called her “auntie” and made inappropriate comments about her being a “good match” for an older male colleague.

Mrs Ilda Esteves, a 61-year-old woman of Indian heritage, worked as a Bank Band 2 Healthcare Assistant across several secure forensic wards at the St Bernard’s Hospital / West London Forensic Service campus, including Windrush Ward, Pearl Ward, Aurora Ward, and the Orchard Unit.

She brought a wide range of claims against the Trust and a colleague, but the tribunal upheld only the harassment allegations linked to comments made on Windrush Ward, where she frequently worked.

The tribunal heard that Team Leader Charles Oppong, based on Windrush Ward, repeatedly addressed her as “auntie”, despite her “specific and repeated” requests to be called by her name. While the panel accepted that “auntie” is considered a respectful term in Ghanaian culture, it ruled that Mr Oppong, as her superior, should not have continued using it once she made clear it was unwelcome.

He also made repeated remarks on Windrush Ward that she would be a “good match” for an older colleague named George. The tribunal described these comments as an “offensive attempt at humour” that created a hostile and degrading working environment for Mrs Esteves.

Because the harassment involved only one individual and took place over a two-month period, the tribunal placed the award at the bottom of the “lower band” for injury to feelings, ordering the Trust to pay her £1,425.15.

At the start of the hearing, Mrs Esteves applied for an anonymity order due to an allegation that she had touched a patient’s bottom. The tribunal refused the request, finding that the email containing the allegation — written by colleague Elspeth Jefferson, who worked with her on Pearl Ward — was “accurate and true”. The panel stressed that there was no suggestion of sexual intent and that the contact may have been inadvertent, but nonetheless inappropriate.

The allegation formed part of an email concerning a church outing involving a patient, during which Ms Jefferson said Mrs Esteves returned late, failed to obtain consent before a bag search, and touched the patient’s bottom. The tribunal described Ms Jefferson as an “utterly credible” witness and concluded that her account of events on Pearl Ward and during the outing was truthful. It also found that Ms Jefferson’s motive had been to support Mrs Esteves and protect her from potential patient complaints.

All other claims — including direct discrimination on the grounds of age, race and sex, harassment related to race, whistleblowing detriment, victimisation and unlawful deduction of wages — were dismissed. Several of the dismissed allegations related to cancelled shifts on Pearl Ward, Aurora Ward, and restrictions on booking shifts in the Orchard Unit, but the tribunal found no discriminatory or retaliatory motive.

A spokesperson for West London NHS Trust said, “We are proud of our diverse workforce, and fostering a safe, supportive and inclusive environment for our staff to work in is important for us. We have a zero-tolerance approach to any form of harassment or discrimination and continually work to uphold these standards for the wellbeing of all of our staff.”

Written with contributions from Philip James Lynch - Local Democracy Reporter