Imagine this: you’re 18, just starting out in the working world, and trying to find your footing — literally.
Elizabeth Benassi was in that exact spot. Fresh-faced and eager, she landed a job only to be thrown into the deep end of a workplace drama over, of all things, her shoes. Yep, her shoes.
Elizabeth wore trainers to work, not realizing her employer had a strict “smart dress code.”
It’s a mistake anyone could make, right? But instead of a gentle nudge or a simple reminder, her boss, Ishrat Ashraf, reportedly came down on her hard.
The tribunal later revealed that Elizabeth felt “treated like a child” over the whole ordeal.
To make matters worse, she pointed out that other employees were strolling around in similar footwear without facing any backlash. Talk about a double standard.
Feeling singled out and unfairly targeted, Elizabeth decided to stand her ground.
Fast forward two years, and now 20, she took her former employer to court — and won. The tribunal ruled in her favor, awarding her nearly £30,000 for victimization.
Now picture this: you’re three months into a new job, surrounded by colleagues just a few years older than you, and trying to find your place in the mix. That was Elizabeth Benassi’s reality when she joined Maximus UK Services in August 2022.
The company, which works with the Department of Work and Pensions to help people get off benefits and back into jobs, seemed like a great start. But for Elizabeth, things quickly took a wrong turn.
Despite being part of a “young group” of employees — most in their early twenties — Elizabeth, the youngest of them all, found herself singled out. After only three months, she was dismissed from the role. Why?
According to an employment tribunal, her bosses had a clear “desire to find fault” with her.
Elizabeth wasn’t about to take that lying down. She challenged her dismissal, claiming she’d been treated unfairly, and the tribunal agreed.
The judge upheld her claims, awarding her a staggering £29,187 in compensation. The case was heard in Croydon, where the tribunal sided with Elizabeth, calling out the unfair treatment she faced.
For Elizabeth Benassi, being the youngest employee wasn’t just a number — it shaped her entire experience. She told the tribunal how it made life “difficult,” leaving her excluded from her team and micromanaged at every turn.
Then came the infamous trainer incident.
On September 26, Elizabeth wore trainers to work, completely unaware that it broke the company’s dress code. Her manager, Ishrat Ashraf, confronted her about it immediately. Elizabeth, polite and eager to make things right, apologized. But things didn’t end there.
Elizabeth later emailed Ms. Ashraf to express how the conversation left her feeling.
In the email, she explained, “This morning you mentioned that I am not allowed to wear trainers to work. Despite not being aware of this… I apologised, and you rolled your eyes.”
She even pointed out the glaring double standard: “I have now realised I am not the only one wearing trainers today, and I have not seen anyone receive the same chat that I have.”
Instead of resolving the issue, the situation escalated. Ms. Ashraf looped in Operations Manager Abdul Ali, who issued a stern declaration: “I want to see a professional dress code at all times.”
But was this really about the dress code, or something deeper?
For Elizabeth, this wasn’t just about shoes. It was about fairness, respect, and the unequal way she was treated compared to her colleagues.
And honestly, how professional can a workplace be if its youngest team member feels singled out and sidelined?
The saga of Elizabeth Benassi’s short-lived job only gets more bizarre.
After the dress-code debacle over her trainers, her manager doubled down. “This is totally unacceptable,” came the stern warning.
“Please adhere to a professional dress code.” But for Elizabeth, the scrutiny didn’t end there.
Later that same day, while working with a client, Elizabeth asked, “Is it ok if I go to the toilet?” To most, it might seem like an innocent question, but not in this office.
Two colleagues emailed her manager, claiming they were “too stunned to speak” and “extremely embarrassed,” with one even admitting they “went bright red.” Really? Over a bathroom question?
The tribunal had a different take. They pointed out that Elizabeth was “being closely monitored,” which made her question seem less surprising. And the real embarrassment?
“Perhaps what was embarrassing,” the judge noted, “was what it said about her working environment.” Imagine being under such a microscope that even a basic human need feels like a test.
And then there was the bowling alley fiasco.
At a team-building event earlier that month, Elizabeth, already self-conscious about being the youngest on the team, privately asked her manager, Ms. Ashraf, not to mention her age.
But instead of respecting her request, Ms. Ashraf spilled the beans. Elizabeth was “shocked and disheartened” to learn that her age, 18, was casually shared with the rest of the staff.
Elizabeth Benassi’s fight for justice revealed a workplace culture that seemed anything but welcoming. “I didn’t want to be treated differently,” she explained.
“Or, as I had put it, ‘as the baby of the group.'” But despite her efforts to fit in, the odds felt stacked against her.
During her three-month stint, Elizabeth filed a grievance against her boss, Ms. Ashraf.
Not long after, on October 31, she was called into a probation meeting. It was there that she learned her fate — she was being dismissed. The reasons?
Management cited everything from her “dress code violations” to her so-called failure to wear “appropriate office attire.”
Elizabeth didn’t back down. She sued for harassment based on her age and victimisation.
While the age harassment claim didn’t stick, the tribunal upheld her victimisation claim, painting a damning picture of her work environment.
Maximus UK Services defended the dismissal, claiming it was due to “concerns about her performance.”
They even argued that other employees weren’t reprimanded for wearing trainers because one had “permission” due to a sore foot.
But Employment Judge Eoin Fowell wasn’t convinced.
If that were true, he said, “Ms. Ashraf would no doubt have mentioned it at the time.” Instead, Elizabeth was “immediately and unfairly tackled” over her footwear as soon as she arrived at the office.
The judge didn’t hold back.
“No allowance was made for the fact that she was new and may not have been familiar with the dress code,” he said. This, he added, created a “hostile working environment,” where Elizabeth was “scrutinised from the moment of her arrival.”
She described being “treated like a child” for simply wearing trainers — hardly a fireable offense.
Ultimately, the tribunal found the company’s actions lacked justification. They pointed out how unusual it was for an employee to fail their probationary period so abruptly.
The panel concluded, “There is no satisfactory explanation as to why Ms. Benassi only lasted three months.”
