A former NHS worker has received nearly £30,000 in compensation after a colleague likened her to Star Wars villain Darth Vader during a team-building exercise.
Lorna Rooke, who was employed by NHS Blood and Transplant, brought the case after a personality quiz used during a workplace event in 2021 resulted in her being compared to the iconic science fiction antagonist. The remark, made by colleague Amanda Harber, followed a Star Wars-themed psychological profile that categorised individuals based on their personality traits.
The team exercise, intended to be light-hearted, involved employees being sorted into 16 archetypes based on varying degrees of introversion, intuition, thinking or feeling preferences, and perception or judgment tendencies. Harber reportedly completed the quiz on Rooke’s behalf and then publicly announced the outcome to others in the group.
The result: Lorna was matched with Darth Vader — a fictional character known for his powerful yet intimidating presence, portrayed as a half-human, half-machine enforcer of the so-called “dark side of the Force.” Despite the profile describing Vader as a “very focused individual” capable of bringing people together, Rooke said the association made her feel alienated, unpopular, and embarrassed in front of colleagues.
She subsequently resigned the following month, citing the incident among her reasons for leaving. Rooke took legal action against her employer and brought the matter before an employment tribunal in Croydon, where she argued that the comparison was not only inappropriate but had a lasting impact on her well-being.
Presiding over the tribunal, Employment Judge Kathryn Ramsden sided with Rooke on claims related to detriment following a protected disclosure. Ramsden stated: “Darth Vader is a legendary villain of the Star Wars series, and being aligned with his personality is insulting. It is little wonder that Ms Rooke was upset by the result.”
Rooke’s legal team highlighted that despite the quiz’s structure being intended for team-building purposes, the public nature of the revelation and the tone in which it was delivered caused undue distress. Although her claims of unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments were not upheld, she was awarded £28,989.61 in compensation.
The payout reflects the tribunal’s recognition of the negative impact the comparison had on Rooke, particularly in light of her decision to leave her role shortly after the incident. NHS Blood and Transplant has been contacted for comment but has yet to respond publicly to the judgment.
This case underscores the potential legal ramifications of workplace banter, particularly when it touches upon sensitive topics or leads to a sense of public humiliation among employees.
While intended as a harmless team activity, the incident highlights the importance of maintaining professionalism during workplace engagement sessions and the need for careful consideration when using personality quizzes or themed exercises.
Rooke’s case has also served as a wider reminder to employers about their duty of care and the impact that informal interactions can have on employees’ emotional well-being. Tribunals continue to scrutinise workplace culture and how organisations respond to complaints — particularly those arising from perceived discrimination, embarrassment, or alienation in the work environment.
The Workers Union Says…
“As workplaces seek to boost morale through creative team-building tools, experts warn that personality tests and gamified psychology models should be deployed with caution, ensuring that participants fully consent and understand the purpose of the exercise.”
