The claimant brought a claim of unfair dismissal arising from the termination of his employment. It was recorded that there were no issues in relation to procedural fairness and that the main matter of dispute was whether the decision to dismiss the claimant was unreasonable or disproportionate. The claimant commenced employment with the respondent as a production operative but was later promoted to Press Operator. 

There were a number of incidents involving the claimant using a forklift, but after a particular incident whereby material was damaged a formal investigation was held. A disciplinary hearing was then conducted which resulted in the decision that the claimant should be dismissed for gross misconduct. The Shift Manager commented that he had ‘lost all trust and confidence’ in the claimant. A right to appeal was offered and accepted but resulted in confirmation of the original decision. 

The real issue was whether the respondent had acted within the band of reasonable responses based on the assertions that there was a breakdown in ‘trust and confidence’ between the parties. It was held that the respondent acted within the range of reasonable responses, despite criticism that the claimant’s actions were categorised as ‘fraud’ as opposed to referring to it simply as ‘gross misconduct’.


Practical lessons

Whilst the Tribunal heavily criticised the respondent’s categorisation of the claimant’s actions as ‘fraud’, this was not sufficient to obviate the refusal of the claim. A noticeable aspect of the case was the exemplary adherence to disciplinary procedure by the respondent and no issues were ever raised regarding this. This undoubtedly added to the perception of the respondent as a ‘reasonable employer’ whose response was measured and rational. The case demonstrates that a serious breakdown in employer-employee relations can, if properly managed, amount to a sufficient basis for dismissing an employee fairly.