Mr P Roberts v FCC Environment UK Limited — 2018

The claimant, Mr P Roberts, brought a single unfair dismissal claim against FCC Environment. The tribunal recorded that the claim was dismissed and that the dismissal on 6 April 2018 was fair. The only issue was whether the respondent had unfairly dismissed him; it was accepted that he had the requisite service and had presented the claim in time.

The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed Mr Roberts for conduct within section 98(2)(b) ERA 1996. The conduct relied on was his use of a mobile phone during working time and his refusal on 4 September 2017 to move mattresses from the site into a skip. The tribunal accepted that he had admitted using the phone at work and had refused the instruction to move the mattresses, and it found those instructions to be legitimate and reasonable in the context of his role as a site attendant.

A live final written warning was already on his record when the mattress incident was considered, and the tribunal found that the warning was valid, not issued in bad faith, and not manifestly inappropriate. It accepted the evidence that the final written warning was issued because of repeated phone-related conduct, and that the respondent’s disciplinary policy permitted a final warning depending on the seriousness of the matter.

Applying section 98(4) ERA 1996 and the Burchell approach, the tribunal held that the respondent had a genuine belief in misconduct based on reasonable grounds and after a reasonable investigation. It concluded that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses and therefore the unfair dismissal claim failed.