Mr Marek Miecznikowski v DHL Services Limited — 2022

The claimant was employed as a warehouse operative and forklift driver. The respondent dismissed him without notice after allegations that he had not consistently worn a face covering in accordance with its health and safety policy during the COVID-19 pandemic and had failed to follow a reasonable request. The claimant said the real reason was redundancy or avoidance of a redundancy payment.

The tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was conduct. It accepted that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had committed misconduct by not wearing a face covering at all times, that the belief was based on reasonable grounds, and that the investigation was reasonable. The tribunal noted some procedural faults, including matters raised in meetings that had not been set out in the written allegations and one email not provided before the disciplinary meeting, but found that these were addressed or not determinative when the procedure was considered overall.

The tribunal found that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. It considered the context of the pandemic, the respondent's face covering rules, the claimant's awareness of the requirement, the procedure for obtaining a visor, and the respondent's health and safety responsibilities. The unfair dismissal claim and the redundancy payment claim were dismissed.