Willer Lafeuillee believed a series of unsettling events at The Running Horses pub in Dorking were deliberately orchestrated to target him. He insisted his colleagues were attempting to “send a message,” though the nature of that message remained deeply contested.
The initial spark ignited over a steak. Lafeuillee reportedly sent his first order back, then ordered a sirloin cooked medium-rare, only to vehemently complain it was undercooked. This escalating dissatisfaction set a tone for the conflicts to come.
He alleged a more insidious form of harassment followed, claiming colleagues strategically placed bottles of vinegar near him as a pointed attack related to his skin color. The atmosphere, according to Lafeuillee, quickly became hostile and deliberately provocative.
His behavior, however, wasn’t limited to complaints. He entered the kitchen, loudly demanding attention from staff, clapping and shouting across the dining area in front of customers. When the replacement steak still didn’t meet his expectations, he declared he wouldn’t pay the bill.
A verbal warning followed the steak incident, a temporary reprieve before further conflict. Lafeuillee’s actions soon escalated to a point where his employers deemed him a risk.
Another aggressive outburst led to his dismissal. Management stated his “erratic and aggressive” conduct created a dangerous environment for his coworkers. The pub prioritized the safety of its staff, ultimately leading to the difficult decision to terminate his employment.
Lafeuillee’s claims extended beyond the steak and the kitchen confrontation. He argued discrimination stemmed from the pub’s music choices, specifically songs by Biggie Smalls and Kanye West containing racial slurs. He also cited a drink served in a London Pride glass and a colleague’s casual utterance of “Yabba Dabba Doo” as evidence of harassment.
Employment Judge Fowell ultimately dismissed all of Lafeuillee’s claims. The judge emphasized the pub’s diverse workforce and noted the considerable patience shown towards Lafeuillee, even during the initial steak dispute.
The court concluded that the allegations were largely based on misinterpretations or possessed innocent explanations. The judge’s ruling underscored the difficulty in substantiating claims of discrimination without concrete evidence, particularly when considering the context of a busy pub environment.
