Married banker sacked over affair with his co-worker sues for sex discrimination

Independent

09-07-2025

A married banker who was sacked over an affair with a junior colleague has sued his employer for discriminating against him 'because he was more senior and male', a tribunal has heard.
Stanislav Stepchuk was dismissed for misconduct after a disciplinary procedure found that he had acted inappropriately in pursuing sexual relations with the co-worker, an employment judge was told.
Stepchuk ended his affair with the junior colleague – referred to as Colleague A – in the summer of 2023 after learning that his wife was pregnant, the London Central Employment Tribunal heard during a preliminary hearing last month.
Stepchuk is now suing his employer for direct sex and age discrimination, sex-related harassment, and unfair dismissal.
'The claimant says the respondent discriminated against him (and that) its approach was 'tainted' by discriminatory assumptions that because he was more senior and male, he was a perpetrator of sexual misconduct,' employment judge Christabel McCooey wrote in her reserved judgment published on Monday.
Stepchuk worked at Merrill Lynch, an American wealth management firm, from March 2018 until the termination of his employment in January 2024, the judge was told.
In January 2023, Stepchuk, then a director at the firm, and Colleague A began exchanging WhatsApp messages, with Stepchuk sending her an intimate photograph of himself four days into their exchange, the tribunal heard.
In those messages, Colleague A disclosed that she was a virgin and 'lacked any sexual experience', the judge was told.
The pair were reportedly intimate on two occasions before Stepchuk ended their relationship.
This caused Colleague A to respond with 'hostility and taunts', Stepchuk claimed before the tribunal.
He further claimed Colleague A threatened him on several occasions 'by suggesting that a disclosure of their relationship to (his employer) would have consequences for his wife, the continuation of her pregnancy, his child, and his parents and that his life may be in danger.'
Colleague A raised a formal grievance against Stepchuk on August 8 2023, in which she claimed he had 'sexually harassed her and threatened her when she said she would be informing HR about her concerns,' the tribunal heard.
Although Stepchuk was dismissed for misconduct, the employer did not uphold Colleague A's complaint of sexual harassment, finding the relationship had been consensual, the tribunal heard.
During the hearing on June 3, Stepchuk asked for his colleague's name to be made public but requested for his own identity to be protected, telling the tribunal that he became 'particularly upset in the asymmetry' that Colleague A would be granted anonymity but he and his family would not.
His request was however dismissed, with Judge McCooey telling the hearing: 'The claimant's opposition has the flavour of wanting to punish Colleague A for her alleged behaviour by 'naming and shaming' her.
'I consider it a significant factor that, unlike Colleague A, the claimant has chosen to bring these proceedings.
'It is not unreasonable to regard the person who initiates proceedings as having accepted the normal incidence of the public nature of court proceedings.'
The case is scheduled for another hearing on July 16.