Mr Y Lunat, solicitor For the v Respondent — 2022

The claimant had worked for the respondent since 2004 and was a Night Manager. Over 2020 and 2021 she repeatedly raised concerns about itemised payslips, holiday notice, holiday pay and wages, both directly to Mr Hobson and later with other staff through an approach to Acas. She was dismissed on 19 August 2021 after disciplinary proceedings about WhatsApp messages, with allegations of serious insubordination, breach of confidence, breach of fidelity and obscene or offensive behaviour.

The tribunal held that the principal reason for dismissal was not conduct but the claimant's assertion of statutory rights. It found that Mr Hobson regarded the staff's approach to Acas as a hostile act, that he used a selective and inadequate investigation process, and that the disciplinary process was used against employees who had stood up for those rights. The tribunal noted that staff were not told the WhatsApp groups were being monitored, that no proper investigation report was produced, and that the claimant's response letter and mitigation were not properly followed up.

In the alternative, the tribunal held that if misconduct had been the reason for dismissal, the ordinary unfair dismissal claim would also have succeeded. Although the claimant's messages were misconduct, the tribunal found the investigation and sanction unreasonable and outside the range of reasonable responses, particularly because the respondent treated the comments in isolation, did not follow its own disciplinary policy, and dismissed even though the decision-maker regarded the conduct as serious, not gross, misconduct. The tribunal reduced any basic and compensatory award by 25% for contributory conduct because of the claimant's 15 May 2021 message about Mr Twigg and Ms Staniforth.