Gillingham Football Club intends to contest an employment tribunal ruling that found it guilty of racial victimisation and unfair dismissal against sacked striker, Mark McCammon.
The former Barbados international player made UK legal history yesterday by becoming the first black footballer to successfully bring such a claim against a professional football club.
He took legal action after being dismissed for alleged misconduct last year. But McCammon told the tribunal of his belief that he and other black colleagues had been treated differently to white players by the club.
For example, he accused Gillingham of trying to “frustrate him out” by refusing to pay private medical bills to help him regain his fitness following injury.
Although a white team mate was flown to Dubai to see a specialist physiotherapist, McCammon claimed that he was only offered NHS treatment and was even fined two weeks’ wages for visiting a private consultant.
But he was dismissed after accusing the club’s then manager, Andy Hessenthaler, of being “racially intolerant” for demanding that he drive to the stadium in the snow, even though white colleagues were allegedly excused.
After apparently receiving a text message threatening to dock two weeks’ wages unless McCammon attended by midday, on arriving at the club, he confronted Hessenthaler, who reacted angrily. McCammon was subsequently called to face a disciplinary hearing, before being sacked.
According to the Daily Telegraph, a statement from his lawyer said that McCammon was both pleased and relieved that the tribunal had found in his favour, adding that he hoped the case would pave the way for players with similar grievances to come forward.
But Gillingham insisted that it was not racist and said that it intended to contest the tribunal’s finding. The club said in a statement: “We are hugely disappointed, in fact staggered, by this decision. As an organisation, we are an equal opportunity employer and do not discriminate against, nor victimise, our staff.”
Given the nature of the case, and its findings, the club would now discuss the judgement with its lawyers and decide upon the next course of action, “whether that be an appeal against the findings, or another form of action, as deemed appropriate”, the statement added.
