The claimant had been employed by the respondent health board since 2001. The claimant had a history of mental ill-health and following his conviction of driving under the influence of alcohol he was dismissed by the respondent.    The reason put forward by the respondent for the dismissal was gross misconduct due to the criminal conviction which directly impacted his ability to fulfil his duties in his job.  It was clear that the respondent required gardeners to have a driving licence for the job and the claimant, as a result of his criminal conviction, was disqualified from driving for two years.   As a result of the decision to dismiss, the claimant brought a claim for unfair dismissal as well as disability discrimination.

The Tribunal examined the working situation of the claimant outlining how his hours had increased following the reduction in the number of gardeners in 2009.  This required the claimant to be on call for two out of every three weeks in the winter months, which was 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.   After this reduction in staff, the claimant had been signed off work for three months in 2010 and four months in 2012 for anxiety and depression.  It had been noted by occupational health that the increased working hours may have contributed towards the condition.  That being said, there had been no absences from 2012 with the claimant controlling his mental health through the use of medication.

In the internal investigation following the drink driving conviction, the claimant outlined that it had stemmed from an argument he had with his girlfriend coupled with the workload which was leading to his anxiety and depression.  A report produced by the respondent outlined that the claimant’s actions amounted to gross misconduct despite the fact that the work pressures may have been a factor for his behaviour.  There was no mention of the claimant’s mental health conditions with the respondent feeling it was not relevant as he had not been signed off since 2012.

The Tribunal found that the dismissal had been unfair.  They outlined that the drink driving conviction was potentially a reasonable ground for dismissal but that the respondent acted unreasonably in failing to take the anxiety and depression of the claimant into account at all.  Therefore, there was an unreasonable level of investigation amounting to unfair dismissal.  The case for disability discrimination was dismissed. Accordingly, the claimant was awarded an award of £10,208.56 which had been reduced as his actions would have amounted to a fair dismissal had the proper investigation been carried out.

Practical Lessons

This case demonstrates the importance of ensuring that a full and proper investigation is carried out when carrying out disciplinary proceedings against an employee.  The Tribunal made it clear that gross misconduct would have been fair as a substantive reason but that the overall decision was unfair due to the failings in the investigation.  Therefore, the particular aspects of any employee going through disciplinary proceedings should be noted and taken into account before a decision is reached.  They must be looked at through the prism of whether it would have demonstrated why certain actions were taken by the employee.  In this case, the failure to consider the anxiety and depression was crucial in determining that the investigation was not reasonable.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5de66891ed915d01784dfef6/Mr_L_Anderson_v_Fife_Health_Board_-_4123858-2018_-_Judgment_.pdf