Carer wins thousands in harassment case after colleagues laughed at her phobia of mushrooms

Carer wins thousands in harassment case after colleagues laughed at her phobia of mushrooms A phobia of mushrooms is called mycophobia - Bookmark - CommentsGo to comments Become an Independent member to bookmark this article Already a member? Log in A carer has won £6,000 in a harassment case after colleagues laughed at her because she has a 'phobia of mushrooms'. Michelle Brain said she has a rare and irrational fear of fungi and a tribunal heard it led to her threatening to punch a colleague over it when they teased her over it. Ms Brain was tasked with going to collect the care home's food shop from Tesco - but she had a panic attack in the supermarket car park when she discovered the delivery order contained mushrooms. She was 'hysterical' and 'struggled to breathe'. When she got back to the care home and was still 'in a highly distressed state', she found other members of staff 'laughing' at her reaction to the fungus. Ms Brain exclaimed that if she saw the member of staff she believed was responsible for the oversight she would 'bang her out'. The carer was given a warning over the 'aggressive' remark - but the care home management failed to consider her anxiety and phobia as the reasons why it was made. A Bristol employment tribunal has now found her treatment amounted to harassment and disability discrimination and as such she has been awarded £6,000. A phobia of mushrooms is called mycophobia. Ms Brain had started working at Rose Care Group Limited in March 2023. She was initially a carer at their Beechwood care home in Yeovil, Somerset, before being promoted to senior carer. Ms Brain 'regular supervisions with her line manager Kayleigh Foster', who was the manager of the care home. During these meetings Ms Foster became aware that the carer 'suffered with anxiety and that this may have an impact on her at work'. She also suffered from mycophobia, a rare and irrational fear of mushrooms, mould, and other fungi. As the tribunal describes: "On December 29 2023, [Ms Brain] was picking up a Tesco food order for the Home on her way into work. "She had a phobia of mushrooms. "When she saw mushrooms within the shopping she had a panic attack in the supermarket car park. "She had not been informed that the shopping contained mushrooms. "She could not put the shopping in her car and called the Home, in the midst of a panic attack, hysterical, crying and struggling to breathe. "She spoke to a colleague Chloe and it was agreed that another staff member would go to pick the shopping up. "[Ms Brain] then went to the Home in a highly distressed state, compounded by anger at not having been informed by [her colleague] Lauren Smith that there were mushrooms in the order. "Upon her arrival, [Ms Brain] was informed that staff had overheard the call and were laughing at her. "In her heightened state, [Ms Brain] said words to the effect of: 'If Lauren comes near me laughing, I’ll bang her out'. "This meant that she would hit Lauren in the face. The words were not said to Lauren, but to Chloe. "Unknown to [Ms Brain], Lauren was in the vicinity and overheard the comment. This upset her. She had not been aware that [Ms Brain] had been tasked with picking up the shopping; she had believed it to be [Ms Foster]. "Lauren’s account at the time, and in evidence, was that had she known that [Ms Brain] was to pick the shopping up, she would have informed her about the mushrooms. "Lauren reported what she had heard [Ms Brain] say, to HR and was given permission to leave the Home to calm down. "In her witness statement Lauren said she could tell that [Ms Brain] was having a severe panic attack. "Upon her return to the Home, [Ms Brain] apologised to Lauren. They agreed they had both over-reached and would put the matter behind them." Other colleagues who witnessed the outburst said they did not really believe that Ms Brain would have hurt anyone and that the comment had 'just slipped out'. Ms Smith was asked if she wanted to complain but said she did not as she understood Ms Brains 'did not mean what she had said'. However two days after the incident occurred, Ms Foster invited Ms Brain to a disciplinary hearing because she had spoken to another member of staff 'in an aggressive way'. Ms Foster said Ms Brain was 'not disciplined for having a panic attack, but for the threatening way she spoke in relation to Lauren'. She 'did not appear to recognise the link made by other staff at the time, between the comment and Ms Brain's anxiety'. Ms Brain explained at the disciplinary hearing on January 1 2024 what had happened with the mushrooms, and added that: "She had felt horrendous, embarrassed and stupid afterwards. She knew she should not have reacted aggressively." However Ms Foster found the carer's 'explanation to have been unsatisfactory because in the care industry it is important not to react in an aggressive way'. She was given a six-month written warning and her anxiety was not taken into consideration for the decision. Ms Foster tried to accommodate some of the carer's issues, including by saying she would not have to come in contact with mushrooms in the kitchen and would wash up 'mushroom residue'. However around a year later, relations between Ms Brains and Ms Foster worsened, with Ms Brains saying she had been bullied. She swore at Ms Foster in texts and shared details of her supervision with colleagues, which was considered a breach of trust. On January 22 2025 Ms Brains was dismissed after failing to turn up to a disciplinary hearing. She has now taken the care home to an employment tribunal alleging whistleblowing detriment, automatically unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation. Ultimately her claims of discrimination arising from disability and harassment were successful but the others were dismissed. She has been awarded £6,000. Employment Judge Susan Bradford concluded: "In December 2023, the Claimant had a phobia of mushrooms. "She had a panic attack. She was disciplined for overreacting because she was in a car park crying. "I find that the Claimant was disciplined for the comment about Lauren, and that this comment arose in consequence of her disability. "The comment was made in the immediate aftermath of the panic attack and whilst the Claimant remained in a heightened state. "It was made because at the time, she blamed Lauren. "When she recovered, she knew this was wrong, that she had overreacted, and she apologised to Lauren. "The Claimant was treated unfavourably because of an overreaction and associated aggressive comment [but] the comment arose in consequence of her disability." Join our commenting forum Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies Comments