A SECOND woman has claimed she quit Nissan's award-winning North-East plant because of a problem with a male colleague.

Claire Archbold, 25, of Bishop Auckland, County Durham, claims she clashed with a male member of staff from the moment she started at the factory in Washington, near Sunderland. She left the company in June 2000.

Ms Archbold was one of three women working with 500 men in the engine assembly department.

When she a made formal complaint, bosses told her they could not do anything.

Nissan said last night that it had thoroughly investigated the claims and concluded the matter had been a clash of personalities.

A spokesman for the Japanese company said Ms Archbold could not be moved because she was on a short term contract.

Instead, she was allowed to leave her job a month early.

The mother-of-one said: "When I walked out, they asked why I didn't say something sooner. But they said I only had four weeks left, so they would either keep me on until the end or let me leave early and pay me until July.

"There was only one option - I just didn't go back."

The episode comes to light in the same week that Beverley Ward, 24, who also worked at Nissan's Washington plant, won an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal and sex discrimination after male colleagues watched pornography in their breaks.

She said a supervisor told her: "They don't want you, because you're a girl," and now stands to be awarded more than £50,000 in compensation.

Ms Archbold, who now works for the cable firm NTL in Stockton, said she regrets not taking similar action.

"I wish I had done what Beverley did," she said. "I think they should have tried to move one of us. This should not be allowed to go on."

Pamela Arullendran, an employment law specialist at Newcastle solicitors Beecham Peacock, said Ms Archbold had missed the deadline to take action. "There is a strict three-month time limit after leaving a company for lodging a complaint," she said.

Wayne Bruce, a Nissan spokesman, said that after interviewing Ms Archbold, the man in question and other staff, the company concluded that there was simply a "personality clash".

He said: "We couldn't move the man because of medical restrictions, and we couldn't move Ms Archbold because she was employed on a temporary contract.

"We didn't want to force her to work with him, so we gave her the option of having six weeks' paid holiday.

"Her contract was always due to come to an end.