Case 1600522/2019 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr M Narzoles (2) Mr R Pajimolin (3) Mr B Tabang v Voltcom Ltd (In Administration) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1600522/2019
- Decision date
- 13 June 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(1) Mr M Narzoles (2) Mr R Pajimolin (3) Mr B Tabang
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimants, all Filipino nationals working as overhead linesmen, were dismissed on 12 May 2015 after allegations that they had not been wearing seat belts while driving a multi-terrain vehicle. Their original tribunal claims had been rejected for non-payment of fees, but were reinstated after the Unison decision, and the respondent took no part in the 30 September 2019 remedy hearing. The tribunal heard oral evidence from Mr Narzoles and Mr Pajimolin, with Tagalog interpretation, and considered the employment contracts, internal appeal material and correspondence with the Embassy of the Philippines.
The tribunal held that the claims of unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, breach of contract and direct race discrimination all succeeded. Applying section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the cited authorities, including British Home Stores v Burchell and Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones, it found that summary dismissal without notice was not justified. On wages, it accepted that there had been underpayments from November 2014 to March 2015 and unpaid overtime for eight weeks in March and April 2015, but it did not allow Mr Narzoles' earlier 2012 non-payment claim because that period was out of time and did not form part of the same series of deductions.
On race discrimination, the tribunal accepted that the claimants were treated less favourably than British employees in relation to sickness absence and working in adverse weather conditions, with Filipino-only gangs being required to keep working and threatened with return to the Philippines if they did not. It found that this treatment amounted to direct race discrimination and that the claimants were upset and fearful about the pressure placed on them. It also accepted that the pressure contributed to the accident that led to the dismissals, although the dismissal claim was determined separately under the unfair dismissal framework.
The tribunal awarded unpaid wages of £12,506.25 for each claimant for the period October 2014 to February 2015, plus £5,079.36 each for overtime. It awarded unfair dismissal basic awards of £950 each for Mr Narzoles and Mr Pajimolin and £1,425 for Mr Tabang, together with compensatory awards of £12,506.25 each up to October 2015. Notice pay of £1,154.42 each was awarded on the contract claim, and each claimant was awarded £10,000 for injury to feelings on the race discrimination claim. The tribunal said the discrimination compensatory losses were already covered by the unfair dismissal compensatory award, made no award for loss of statutory rights, and recorded total gross compensation of £42,196.28 each for Mr Narzoles and Mr Pajimolin and £42,671.28 for Mr Tabang.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissals unfair and that summary dismissal without notice was not justified under s.98 ERA 1996 and the cited case law. The aggregate figure reflects the basic awards and compensatory awards for all three claimants; the notice pay was dealt with separately as breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £40,844 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted underpayments for the period November 2014 to March 2015 and unpaid overtime in March and April 2015. It rejected Mr Narzoles' earlier 2012 non-payment claim as out of time and not part of the same series of deductions. | Upheld | — | £52,757 |
| Breach of contract | This corresponds to notice pay of £1,154.42 for each claimant following the summary dismissals. | Upheld | — | £3,463 |
| Race discrimination | The tribunal found direct race discrimination in the different treatment of Filipino workers compared with British workers in relation to sickness absence and unsafe weather working. It awarded £10,000 injury to feelings to each claimant and made no separate compensatory loss award because those losses were already covered by the unfair dismissal compensatory award. | Upheld | Race | £30,000 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £127,064
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £3,325
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £37,519
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.98 ERA 1996
- British Home Stores v Burchell
- Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones
- Vento band
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.