The practice manager of a GP surgery has won more than £140,000 in compensation after a ‘gossiping’ female doctor described her and her family as the ‘Clarkashians’.
An employment tribunal heard Catherine Clark was mocked by staff after ringleader Dr ‘George’ Williams became ‘obsessed’ with her, viewing her as a ‘source of entertainment’ and sending ‘unkind’ messages behind her back.
In one WhatsApp about the 62-year-old grandmother, the family doctor – who viewed her as ‘past it’ – said she was ‘trying to dislodge the old knacker’ comparing her to an old horse that needed to be put down, an employment tribunal heard.
In another, she sent a disparaging message about ‘narcissistic’ Mrs Clark’s daughter and partner entitled: ‘Clarkashian Update’ which was in relation to them getting tested for covid.
This was a reference to the popular reality TV show, The Kardashians, which the tribunal heard featured a ‘glamorous and successful’ family, and is set among the celebrity scene of Los Angeles rather than the Welsh town of Wrexham, where Mrs Clark and her relatives live.
Dr Williams’ nickname for them, however, was not meant in a complimentary manner but in a ‘derogatory, mocking sense’, the tribunal concluded.
After her complaints about her treatment at the surgery were ignored, Mrs Clark resigned and successfully sued for discrimination, harassment, victimisation and unfair dismissal.
She has now won £142,803 after Employment Judge Rachel Harfield found Dr Williams had displayed ‘unsympathetic and discriminatory’ views towards her.
This includes £32,550 for injury to feelings, £60,873 for financial losses and £16,844 for unfair dismissal.
The hearing in Cardiff was told that as well as working as practice manager at Gardden (corr) Road Surgery Mrs Clark and her family were also patients there.
Dr Williams – who was known as ‘Dr George’ – had worked there since 2016 and was made partner in the autumn of 2020.
The tribunal heard that staff at the surgery regularly made remarks about Mrs Clark’s drinking and her need for medication from the GPs to deal with anxiety and depression.
In August 2020 she made a complaint after it emerged that a colleague had been accessing her medical records to see what prescriptions she had been getting.
The tribunal was told by Dr Williams’ former partner that she had been making disparaging remarks about Mrs Clark for several years by that point including referring to her and her family as the ‘Clarkashians’.
‘We note that his evidence alleges that (Dr Williams) had an obsession with (Mrs Clark) and her family,’ the panel said.
‘He says that (she) would exchange messages with (colleagues) about the family. He says that around this time (Dr Williams and another colleague) began to access and share medical records concerning the family.
‘We find (Mrs Clark) and her family were the source of gossip amongst the staff…that gossip in part related to prescription medications.’
The tribunal heard that Dr Williams considered Mrs Clark to be incompetent and shared ‘unkind gossip’ when she passed on a message from the surgery’s accountant, describing her as ‘inept’ to a colleague.
The doctor’s former partner – with whom she had broken up acrimoniously – got in touch with Mrs Clark in December 2021 to inform her what she had been saying behind her back.
One message about Mrs Clark stated: ‘Now trying to dislodge the old knacker but like any decent tumour she has a long root!’, the tribunal heard.
Mrs Clark complained to the practice’s senior partner about the messages, describing herself as ‘devastated’ and ‘torn in half’ by how Dr Williams had described her.
She then went off sick before becoming embroiled in a dispute with the practice about covid vaccination payments that were made to a company she had set up.
A grievance Mrs Clark launched about her treatment was partially upheld but the surgery refused to recognise that and in December she resigned.
She took the surgery to the tribunal where her claims of unfair constructive dismissal and breach of contract were upheld.
Her claims of disability and age harassment and unfavourable treatment due to disability – relating to Dr Williams’ comments about her and her sharing of the accountant’s views with a colleague – were upheld.
The practice was also found to have victimised her by failing to take action against Dr Williams and for the way it handled the outcome of her grievance.
Employment Judge Harfield said: ‘We find that (Dr Williams) did not consider (Mrs Clark) to be good at her job, Underlying that view was an age discriminatory view in that (she) considered (her) ‘past it’.’
She creating a ‘degrading, or humiliating environment for her’ by ‘ridiculing’ her, the tribunal found.
The panel found that the GP had ‘fixated’ on the Clarks who she considered were ‘living a ‘Clarkashian’ lifestyle’. It added: ‘The Claimant and her family and others associated with them became a source of entertainment and gossip.’
Employment Judge Harfield concluded that Mrs Clark’s ‘resignation and the financial losses that flowed from that resignation are losses that flow directly from the discriminatory/harassment/victimisation acts found.