Skip to content
12 November 2026

College ordered to pay £81k to victimised security guard

South Bank University Group admits errors and apologises after tribunal finds employee was forced to quit

Anviksha Patel

More from this author
4 min read
|

A London college group has been ordered to pay more than £80,000 to a former security guard after a tribunal ruled that she was victimised and forced out of her job.

The employment tribunal found that Toyin Orisaremi was driven to quit in 2024 after the London South Bank Colleges’ handling of her reports of blackouts and dizziness experienced while working as a security guard.

The college said it acted over safety concerns, but the tribunal ruled that its handling of her suspension, pay and grievance amounted to victimisation.

South Bank Colleges, which runs Lambeth College and London South Bank Technical College, is rated ‘good’ by Ofsted and part of the London South Bank University (LSBU) Group. It said it regrets the “errors” it made and has apologised to Orisaremi.

According to a remedy judgment published this week, the college group must pay her £81,291.59.

An LSBU Group spokesperson said: “We accept the findings of the tribunal; the judgment has highlighted that this was a complex case in which errors were made in our management of the situation, which we regret. We have learned from these events and have taken steps to address this, including further training for our staff.

“We would like to apologise to Ms Orisaremi for the distress this experience has caused.”

Shown the door

Orisaremi resigned in May 2024. The original tribunal found that she left due to a “cumulative course of conduct” by the college, which “destroyed trust and confidence”.

This included failures regarding recommendations from occupational health, which helps employers to make reasonable adjustments for workers struggling with physical and mental health. They also covered its handling of her suspension, pay and a grievance she raised.

In a reconsideration judgment, the tribunal went further and ruled that Orisaremi’s forced resignation was itself an act of victimisation. It found that managers and HR staff knew about complaints she had made, and they had a “significant influence” on how they treated her, which drove her to quit.

During the proceedings, the college accepted that some of the matters amounted to victimisation.

She won her complaints of victimisation, constructive dismissal, unauthorised deduction from wages and claims for holiday and notice pay.

The tribunal also allowed Orisaremi to claim for psychiatric injury “caused or materially aggravated” by the victimisation, including her suspension and how her pay and grievance were handled. She was later awarded £3,500 for personal injury.

Disability claims fail

In the first judgment issued in August, the judge dismissed Orisaremi’s claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment.

It initially ruled that Orisaremi was not disabled but later accepted that it had overlooked the college’s own admission that she was disabled by anxiety.

However, the judge said that the college could not reasonably have known her anxiety was a disability. Orisaremi had told occupational health her anxiety stemmed from ongoing symptoms and “perceived” work stress, and it expected her mood to settle “within weeks”.

It found the college’s treatment of her was driven by concerns about blackouts she had reported and her “safety-critical” duties as a security guard.

It upheld its earlier findings that her blackouts, dizziness and back pain were not classed as disabilities.

Financial security

The total compensation includes a basic award of £3,850 and £17,475 for past loss of earnings.

Orisaremi was awarded £30,000 for injury to feelings, one third of which was related to her unfair dismissal, and two thirds attributed to her pre-dismissal treatment.

The judge also awarded her £2,500 in aggravated damages. These are usually awarded where an employer has acted in a malicious or oppressive way, including how it defends a claim or complaints.

Employment Judge Harley added an uplift of nearly £5,900 after the college failed to follow the ACAS code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures.

The total also includes £2,937 in notice pay, £1,141 in holiday pay, £737 in unpaid sick pay, £500 for loss of statutory rights, almost £8,000 in interest, and a tax gross-up of £4,806.

Orisaremi was contacted for comment.

 

Share

Explore more on these topics

No Comments

Featured jobs from FE Week jobs / Schools Week jobs

Browse more news