By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

An ex-Atlantis manager fired for sexual harassment, and who allegedly told a junior employee “he would kidnap me and carry me to Canada”, has lost his $162,343 claim for wrongful and unfair dismissal.

Ingrid Cooper-Brooks, the Industrial Tribunal’s vice-president, in an August 22, 2025, ruling found the Paradise Island mega resort had established “reasonable grounds” through the investigation it conducted to determine that Omar Davis was guilty of “gross misconduct” and “behaviour unbecoming of a manager”.

Her verdict revealed that the events leading to the dismissal of Mr Davis, a 16-year Atlantis veteran who held the position of food and beverage cashier manager and earned $826 per week, were sparked when he ordered that an employee be disciplined just as the COVID-19 pandemic and related restrictions were ending.

Between May 2021 and June 2022, Atlantis food and beverage staff were required to work a six-day week with “blackout days” when they were unable to get time off or take vacation. Mr Davis, on June 8, 2022, ordered that a cashier be disciplined for “constant lateness”.

This, though, prompted the cashier involved and two colleagues to visit Atlantis’ human resources department the following day to report that Mr Davis had denied them “time off”. After the complaint was made, one of the two employees accompanying the disciplined cashier “remained behind and reported she had been sexually harassed and assaulted by Mr Davis from August/September 2021 to June 2022”. 

Mr Davis “categorically denied the allegations, and maintained that his relationship with the complainant was only professional” once the claims were probed by Atlantis’ security investigations unit. Nevertheless, he was suspended for an initial four days, which was extended for a further two, before he was allowed to return to work on June 17, 2022, only to be confronted with additional evidence.

“After receiving Mr Davis’ response, management concluded that he was guilty of the alleged offences and terminated his employment,” Ms Cooper-Brooks recorded. “He appealed the decision, but it was upheld by [Atlantis]. He then applied for a review of the decision; however, it was once again reaffirmed by the Review Board.”

Dissatisfied, Mr Davis launched his wrongful and unfair dismissal claim before the Industrial Tribunal, seeking a combination of notice and vacation pay plus other benefits worth a collective $162,343 as well as his reinstatement by Atlantis.

Some $72,982 was sought for wrongful dismissal alone, including pension, health insurance, Christmas bonus and gratuities. Mr Davis also suggested that the “incident reports” on the complaint against him “showed signs of collusion” between the resort and his accuser.

“He alleged that when the complainant realised that their initial complaint to management had failed to have him disciplined for reprimanding the staff member with whom she had a sexual relationship, she devised a plan to coerce the company into dismissing him by alleging sexual harassment,” Ms Cooper-Brooks wrote. “He asserted that this compelled the respondent to take action against him.”

The Industrial Tribunal asserted that it found “no evidence” to support the collusion claim. And it noted that Mr Davis knew of his accuser’s identity and the nature of the allegations against him, and was provided with the supporting evidence including the incident reports and What’s App messages “mostly retrieved from his cell phones”.

The victim, who alleged “several instances of sexual harassment and sexual assault”, claimed this began in August/September 2021 when Mr Davis started to call her into his office and began asking her “personal questions” about her relationship with her boyfriend and where she lived.

This allegedly progressed from “hugging” to “kissing”, where she often turned her head to avoid contact with Mr Davis. The office door would always be closed or locked, and she alleged he would frequently check the camera monitors to ensure no other staff were approaching.

“There were also times when Mr Davis got up from his office chair and came around his desk to physically touch on my body,” the victim asserted. “I one time told Mr Davis he has to stop because he has a lot to lose, like his job position and family.” She refused his requests to see her outside of work.

“For the majority of times when Mr Davis would communicate with me it would be via phone calls. He was adamant about me deleting my What’s App chats with him,” she alleged. “Mr Davis would question me about if my boyfriend goes through my phone. Mr Davis once told me he would kidnap me and carry me to Canada.”

The female employee said she spoke out because she had heard “a few current situations going on like this now” with Mr Davis allegedly “doing stuff like this to other new cashiers” and taking photographs of them.

Atlantis, in its testimony, said that based on the evidence it determined that Mr Davis had violated its sexual harassment and code of conduct policies and “created a hostile work environment. This type of behaviour is egregious, inappropriate and unbecoming of a manager and will not be tolerated”.

Mr Davis, though, argued that his dismissal was unjust and wrong because Atlantis had failed to prove it “honestly and reasonably believed on a balance of probability” that an employee was guilty of the alleged misconduct and that it had conducted the necessary investigation. Both these requirements are stipulated by the Employment Act.

“The applicant categorically denied sexually harassing or physically touching the complainant, maintaining that he had acted professionally at all times,” the Industrial Tribunal said of Mr Davis’ case. “While he acknowledged their telephone conversations and e-mail communication, and hugging the complainant once, he asserted that she had solicited the hug as a gesture of appreciation for his kindness.

“It was noted that the complainant denied this assertion. The applicant explained, however, that he took pictures of all his staff, including the complainant, which were intended to be displayed on the staff board to improve morale.” However, Tesma Moss-Lloyd, Atlantis’ executive director of human resources, said the photos seemed “inappropriate”.

The victim also “sketched the interior layout” of Mr Davis’ house, and the latter’s phone logs and What’s App messages showed he often started most conversations by saying: “Can you take a call?” There was also a message from Mr Davis reporting that someone, likely his wife, was suspicious of one call because he was “whispering”. Atlantis executives testified he was unable to explain this.

Ms Cooper-Brooks found that Atlantis had met the Employment Act threshold for conducting a reasonable probe into the complaints and forming an “honest and reasonable belief” that Mr Davis was guilty of the alleged misconduct. She dismissed both the wrongful and unfair dismissal claims.