Ill-judged conduct doesn’t automatically mean your employer can fairly sack you.
“Unfair and wrongful dismissalA breach of contract claim, usually about not being given the correct notice or notice pay, decided under ordinary contract law rather than employment rights legislation. It is different from unfair d... upheld; reinstatement ordered plus around £42,300 compensation.”
Your employer needs a genuine, reasonable belief that your conduct was serious enough to justify dismissal. A policy label that happens to fit isn't enough on its own.
- If you're accused of misconduct, ask what less severe options (a warning, mediation, an apology) your employer considered and why they were ruled out.
- A disciplinary policy's broad definition of "bullying" or "gross misconduct" doesn't automatically make your specific conduct serious enough to be dismissed for it.
- If your employer suggested resolving things informally and then dismissed you anyway, get advice. That inconsistency can be central to an unfair dismissalA legal claim you can bring if your employer dismissed you without a fair reason or without following a fair process. You normally need two years of continuous employment to qualify, though some dismi... claim.
The situation
A train driver placed a shed tarantula skin in a female colleague's pigeonhole as a prank, after learning she disliked spiders. When she objected, he later left a shed snakeskin in the same pigeonhole. She was distressed both times and raised a formal complaint. Following a disciplinary process, the driver was summarily dismissed for gross misconductBehaviour serious enough that your employer is entitled to dismiss you immediately without notice. Common examples include theft, violence, or serious dishonesty, but what counts depends on your emplo... under his employer's harassmentUnwanted behaviour related to a protected characteristic, such as your sex, race, disability, age or religion, that violates your dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating environment... and bullyingRepeated, unreasonable behaviour towards you at work that undermines you or damages your dignity, such as persistent criticism, exclusion, humiliation, or intimidation. Bullying on its own is not auto... policy, and his appeal was rejected.
What the tribunal found
The tribunal held the dismissal unfair and wrongful. It found the employer had no reasonable grounds to treat the pranks as gross misconduct under s.98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The dismissing and appeal officers had overlooked evidence that the colleague herself described the exchange as "over the top banter," and had unreasonably assumed the pranks were capable of causing a state of shock serious enough to risk a "catastrophic accident." The tribunal described the conduct as "plainly very ill-judged but extremely unlikely in reality to have led to such serious impacts," involving "no risk of physical harm" and amounting to "largely harmless, childish pranks." Both disciplinary officers had themselves floated informal resolution, such as mediation, before dismissing him anyway, which the tribunal found inconsistent with a genuine belief in gross misconduct. Because the conduct fell short of gross misconduct, the summary dismissal also breached his contractual notice entitlement. A later remedy judgment ordered his reinstatement, along with compensation of around £42,300.
Richardson v West Midlands Trains Ltd. Case Nos. 3300402/2023 and 3302080/2023. Watford Employment Tribunal. October 2023.