The claimant was employed by the respondent as a Field Monitoring Officer from November 2016 until she was dismissed on 22nd June 2020.   The role involved the claimant attending the home premises of individuals who were subject to curfew orders.  This was to install or remove electronic tags.   As a result, the claimant was unable to work from home during the first coronavirus lockdown from March 2020.

The respondent held daily Covid-19 conference calls to deal with any issues that were arising for those who were carrying out their duties.  One of the issues raised was that the claimant had to take long journeys and public toilets were closed.  The respondent was to compile a list of public toilets which were available for their staff to use.   On 6th April 2020 the claimant was tasked to visit two individuals in Cumbria.  The claimant did not go citing that there were no available toilets in the area.   The following day on the conference call, a colleague explained that there was a nearby petrol station which allowed key workers to use the toilet.

The claimant telephoned the two individuals in Cumbria and noted in the file that they both stated they were in risk categories and did not want to be visited.   The line manager thought this was odd as the electronic tags showed them moving around and he phoned the two individuals and they stated they were not asked about Covid-19 nor did they outline they were in risk categories.   The claimant was subsequently suspended on full-pay pending an investigation relating to gross misconduct.  Following this process, the claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct considering the false information in the reports and the negligence in performing her duties.

The claimant also brought a claim relating to pay when was in self-isolation from 29th April to 13th May 2020.   The respondent’s policy stated that in those situations employees would only be entitled to statutory sick pay.   The claimant stated she was not made aware of this and that she should have been entitled to her normal salary.  The Tribunal dismissed both claims.  On unfair dismissal, it was held that misconduct was a fair reason, and the employer had a genuine belief on reasonable grounds that the claimant had committed gross misconduct, that being the falsification of the reports.  Her pay claim was also dismissed on the basis that any additional entitlement to sick pay is governed by the company’s policies and there was no additional statutory right even where there was self-isolation.

Practical Lessons

This case demonstrates that the effects of the pandemic did not mitigate the need to actually carry out the work properly.  The claimant sought to avoid the work by citing the lack of toilets, which was corrected by fellow employees, and then by falsifying statements from the subjects she was to visit.  It was only right that the respondent’s succeeded with gross misconduct.  The pay claim also demonstrates that there was no special allowance to be given for those who had to self-isolate, and it would go back to the company policies as to whether there would be additional rights to money compared to statutory sick pay.
https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ms-n-baron-v-capita-business-services-ltd-2413927-slash-2020