Google Employee Claims Redundancy After Harassment Report

Published: 11 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online

A senior Google employee has told a UK employment tribunal that she was made redundant after reporting sexual harassment by a manager, raising serious questions about whistleblower protection and workplace culture at one of the world’s largest technology companies.

Victoria Woodall, a senior industry head in Google’s UK Sales and Agencies team, claims she was subjected to a sustained campaign of retaliation after alerting senior management to allegations involving a male colleague who, she said, behaved inappropriately with clients and staff. According to evidence presented to the London Central Employment Tribunal, the manager was later dismissed for gross misconduct following an internal investigation that upheld claims of sexual harassment.

Ms Woodall alleges that, rather than being protected for raising concerns, she became the target of adverse treatment by her own management, ultimately leading to her redundancy. Google strongly denies these claims, arguing that her redundancy was part of a wider restructuring and that it did not retaliate against her in any way.

The tribunal heard that the case dates back to August 2022, when Ms Woodall was approached by a female client following a business lunch. The client alleged that a manager in Ms Woodall’s team had spoken in graphic terms about his personal life, including boasting about the number of black women he had slept with and describing himself and his wife as swingers. According to court documents, the client said the conversation was unsolicited, took place in front of the manager’s own line manager, and left her feeling deeply uncomfortable.

Ms Woodall reported the incident to her line manager, Matt Bush, who was then managing director of the agency team. Google subsequently launched an internal investigation. While that inquiry was ongoing, Ms Woodall raised further concerns after another female client alleged that the same manager had shown her a nude image of his wife while scrolling through photographs on his phone during a work interaction.

Documents submitted to the tribunal show that Google interviewed 12 people as part of its investigation. The inquiry uncovered additional allegations involving staff rather than clients. On the balance of probabilities, the company concluded that the manager had sexually harassed two female colleagues at a work event, including touching one colleague’s leg and rubbing another’s back and shoulders without consent.

The investigation also found that the manager had made inappropriate sexual comments in the workplace, including allegedly telling a female colleague he had just met that he was in an open marriage and suggesting that if she had sex with him in a bathroom, his wife would enjoy hearing about it. The manager denied the allegations, telling investigators that he did not believe he had shared details of his open relationship at work. Nevertheless, Google dismissed him for gross misconduct.

The tribunal heard that the manager’s line manager and another senior colleague were criticised for failing to intervene or challenge his behaviour. Both were recommended for documented coaching and were later made redundant as part of a restructuring.

Ms Woodall claims that soon after she raised the harassment concerns, her own working situation began to deteriorate. She told the tribunal that she was effectively forced to give up a successful client account and take on a struggling one, previously handled by a colleague who was later disciplined in connection with the investigation. She described the move as a “poisoned chalice” that weakened her position and left her vulnerable when redundancy decisions were later made.

She further alleges that she was sidelined from senior responsibilities, demoted to a subordinate role on a major internal project, and subjected to attempts to downgrade her performance ratings. In her claim, she argues that these steps were part of a pattern of retaliation orchestrated by her management after her whistleblowing.

Ms Woodall also raised broader concerns about what she described as a “boys’ club” culture within parts of Google UK. Among her allegations was the existence of a men-only “chairman’s lunch” that she said had been funded by the company until late 2022. Google disputes this, telling the tribunal that an internal investigation found no evidence of a discriminatory culture and that the event was discontinued because it no longer aligned with company policies.

In 2023, amid a wider redundancy programme at Google, Ms Woodall escalated her concerns to senior leadership. She met with Debbie Weinstein, then vice-president of Google UK and Ireland, who, according to court documents, appeared shocked by the allegations. Messages submitted to the tribunal show Ms Weinstein describing the meeting to a colleague in strong terms.

Later that year, as Google prepared for a broader reorganisation, internal messages cited in court appear to suggest discussions about using the restructuring process to remove certain individuals from teams. Ms Woodall claims this marked a final effort to push her out of the organisation. In March 2024, she was formally made redundant. She remains employed by Google on long-term sickness payments due to work-related stress, according to her claim.

Google accepts that Ms Woodall’s original report constituted whistleblowing but firmly rejects the allegation that she was targeted as a result. In its defence, the company says her role was one of 26 eliminated across her team and department, and that all subsequent decisions were legitimate business actions. Google also denies that senior executives sought to engineer her redundancy, stating that leadership took her concerns seriously and initiated reviews into workplace culture.

A judgment from the London Central Employment Tribunal is expected in the coming weeks. The case is being closely watched as it raises wider issues about corporate accountability, whistleblower protection and how large organisations respond to allegations of sexual misconduct within their ranks.