A former Royal Navy pilot trainee has seen her sex discrimination lawsuit against the Ministry of Defence dismissed after an employment tribunal determined the MoD could not be held vicariously liable for the alleged actions of a contracted instructor.
Failed Training and Allegations of Gatekeeping
Hannah McCann, who was training to become a pilot at the Royal Naval Air Station in Yeovilton, Somerset, failed her Final Aptitude Test in May 2023. This failure prevented her from progressing to the next stage of pilot training, ultimately leading to her departure from the Royal Navy. Ms McCann described the outcome as devastating, both for her planned military career and her emotional wellbeing.
She alleged that her instructor, identified only as Mr Pearson, failed to provide adequate training, leaving her with a significant knowledge gap. Ms McCann compared the situation to a driving instructor neglecting to teach a learner how to use indicators. She further claimed that Mr Pearson exercised a gatekeeping function in determining whether she would pass her training, and that his actions constituted both sex discrimination and harassment.
Contractor Status Proves Decisive
The employment tribunal in Bristol heard that the MoD had contracted Babcock International Group to provide pilot training. Mr Pearson was an employee of Babcock, not a direct employee of the Royal Navy. The MoD applied to have the complaints against Mr Pearson struck out, arguing it could not be held vicariously liable for any alleged discriminatory acts by a contractor.
The tribunal agreed with this argument. It found that while the MoD was responsible for selecting, grading, or withdrawing trainee pilots, the training itself was delivered by a contracted third party. An MoD employee testified that reports filed on Ms McCann's performance, which initially seemed positive, were completed in a manner entirely consistent with standard instructor expectations.
Judge Notes a 'Legal Vacuum'
Employment Judge Colm Henry O'Rourke, while dismissing the case, made a notable observation. He stated that Ms McCann was correct in identifying a potential legal vacuum. The judge noted that the MoD could, in effect, evade direct responsibility for discrimination allegations by utilising contracted instructors instead of service personnel.
The tribunal concluded that, were it not for the alleged acts of discrimination and harassment by Mr Pearson, Ms McCann might still be serving in the Royal Navy. However, due to the contractor arrangement, the legal responsibility did not fall upon the Ministry of Defence. Consequently, all of Ms McCann's claims were struck out before a full tribunal hearing could commence.
