Mr P Bednarczyk v WGC Limited — 2019

The claimant, a Night Manager, complained of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal after being dismissed without notice for misconduct. The respondent relied on matters including his failure to disclose that his wife was a director of Phoenix Deluxe Limited, his delay in reporting suspicion that a worker did not have the legal right to work in the UK, a Facebook post about another manager, and an allegation about asking for work while on sick leave. The tribunal found that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant had committed misconduct and that the central facts underlying the allegations were largely not in dispute.

On unfair dismissal, the tribunal found that the investigation was within the band of reasonable responses. It accepted that the respondent was not required to establish an actual conflict of interest because its Conflict of Interest Policy covered perceived conflicts. It also found that the respondent was entitled to consider that the claimant, as a senior manager with relevant training, should have reported his suspicion about the worker immediately and by any means available to him. Although the tribunal found that the initial decision-maker did not reasonably hold the belief about the claimant seeking immediate secondary floor work, it found that this defect was cured on appeal when that allegation was not upheld.

The tribunal concluded that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. It found that the claimant breached the Conflict of Interest Policy by failing to disclose his wife's interest in Phoenix, failed to report his suspicions about the worker at the earliest opportunity, and breached the Social Networking Policy by posting an offensive comment about a colleague on Facebook. It found that these matters together led the respondent to lose trust and confidence in him. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.

On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found that the claimant's failure to immediately report the suspected right-to-work issue amounted to gross misconduct because it was a serious neglect of duties and exposed the respondent to the risk of employing someone without the legal right to work. It found that the non-disclosure of his wife's interest in Phoenix and the Facebook post did not individually amount to gross misconduct, but together with the reporting failure they breached the respondent's trust and confidence. The tribunal held that the claimant's conduct repudiated the contract and that the respondent did not breach the contract by dismissing him without notice. No monetary award was made.