1. Mrs S Ridge 2. Mrs R Grainger v Avery of Loxley Park (Homecare) Ltd — 2021

Both claimants were dismissed on 7 August 2020 after disciplinary proceedings arising from anonymous complaints about their conduct at the respondent's home. The tribunal accepted that the reason for dismissal in each case was conduct, and it accepted that the allegations, if proved, were capable of amounting to gross misconduct. However, the dismissals were found to be unfair because the process followed was outside the band of reasonable responses under s.98(4) ERA 1996.

The tribunal held that the respondent dealt with the anonymous allegations unreasonably. The statements were not sufficiently specific as to time, place and detail; there was no adequate inquiry into why witnesses sought anonymity or whether they had any reason to fabricate; the decision-maker did not interview the complainants to test weight; and the record-keeping was poor. Mrs Grainger did not receive the minutes of her investigatory meeting, and both claimants had only about 24 hours to prepare for the disciplinary hearing. The tribunal also found it unreasonable that the charges were expanded during the process from verbal abuse of members to conduct and attitude towards staff, and ultimately framed as bullying and harassment.

The appeal process did not cure the defects. It was conducted as a paper exercise, and Ms Miles did not speak to either claimant, although she did speak to management. The tribunal found no proper consideration had been given to the claimants' points on appeal. It found no sufficient evidence that the investigation was actually biased, but held that the overall procedure, including the handling of the anonymous evidence and the later post-hearing enquiries, was unfair. Applying Polkey, the tribunal found that a fair procedure would have required about two further weeks and that there was a 60% chance each claimant would still have been fairly dismissed. It also reduced any compensatory award by a further 20% for contributory conduct, relying on the claimants' admissions and lack of apology. Remedy was listed for a separate hearing.