The claimant was employed by a purser, operating on the Strangford Ferry, from 14th May 2016 until his dismissal for gross misconduct on 26th July 2018.   There were two issues that arose in this case.  The first related to the reason for the dismissal.  The claimant, in his position as purser, issued tickets to those who were on the Strangford Ferry.  One of the passengers seeking a single passenger and car ticket, paid £5.80 and had their receipt thrown in the bin when they stated they did not require it.   This may seem innocuous but on telling her sister, Mrs Teggart, the SPTO responsible for the Strangford Ferry, she found it against the normal procedure and that it should be investigated. On investigation, it was found that the claimant had in fact issued a blue badge holder ticket which would cost £2.50 yet he had taken the whole amount.

The respondent based upon this finding conducting a fuller investigation finding that of the total tickets issued by the claimant 17.49% were blue badge tickets yet overall, it was only 10.81%. Indeed, on some sailings this reached over 30% and up to 70%. There were also situations where blue badge tickets had been issued then rescinded with the suggestion that this may have been customers querying why their ticket was issued as such. As a result, the claimant was suspended and the NICS Fraud Unit was made aware of the matter.  After having the investigation and a disciplinary hearing a decision was made that the statistical evidence demonstrated ‘gross misconduct’ and that the one instance with Mrs Teggart’s sister was ‘misconduct’. The claimant challenged this as being unfair dismissal.

The second issue was a grievance issued by the claimant during this process alleging that there was age discrimination as he stated he had been receiving less wheelhouse training than older colleagues which then stopped him from obtaining a Boatmaster’s Licence. This would allow him to be promoted to a senior purser.  However, under cross-examination the Tribunal noted that the claimant agreed that he had received the same training as the older pursers, who were employed on an agency basis.  Therefore, the age discrimination claim was dismissed.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the Tribunal found that there was a fair reason for the dismissal, that being conduct.   It noted that the use of inferences from statistical evidence may be difficult but considering the low value involved it would be difficult to detect otherwise.   The Tribunal did outline that there should have been a statement from Mrs Teggart’s sister who was the subject of the first allegation brought against the claimant.  Despite this, the Tribunal found in favour of the respondent dismissing the unfair dismissal claim.

Practical Lessons

This case demonstrates the extent to which keeping proper statistical evidence in areas where individuals are making multiple small sales can be beneficial.  The use of the statistical evidence coupled with the one evidenced example of selling cheaper tickets and retaining the excess was sufficient in evidencing the gross misconduct.

Without keeping these records, there may have been misconduct shown for the one instance, but it would not have been sufficient to show that the dismissal was fair.  Therefore, keeping proper records of how the individual employee is carrying out their work in such an environment can be beneficial if issues to arise with money handling.