Ms G Churchouse, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2020

This was a single-claim case for unfair dismissal under section 98 ERA 1996. The claimant, Alexander Hawkes, had less than two years' service, so jurisdiction depended on whether the principal reason for dismissal was, or was connected with, his membership of a reserve force under section 48 Defence Reform Act 2014. The tribunal considered that question first and did not reach a full unfair-dismissal merits analysis because the jurisdictional issue was determinative.

The tribunal found that the respondent knew the claimant was a reservist when it hired him, and that it later accepted his resignation, which he had given to pursue a full-time Armed Forces role, and then allowed him to rescind that resignation on new conditions. Those conditions included a three-month probationary period, a reduced sales target, and a new monthly meetings target. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had continued to discuss reservist commitments and that there were references within the respondent's internal emails to the Royal Marines and to his commitment to the company.

The tribunal found that the claimant's performance had deteriorated from August 2018 onwards and that the respondent was also influenced by attendance issues and repeated credit-card misuse. It accepted that the respondent kept a close eye on sales performance and that the claimant was well under target by early January 2019. The tribunal did not accept that the 7 January pipeline document materially drove the dismissal decision; it was created after the decision had already been made and merely reinforced it.

Applying the authorities it considered helpful on the meaning of "connected with", including London Ambulance Service v Charlton and Atkin v Coil Personnel plc, the tribunal concluded that the principal reason for dismissal was poor performance viewed by the respondent as reflecting a lack of commitment. It held that the claimant's reservist status was not the principal cause, and that the respondent would likely have reacted in the same way if he had resigned to pursue another career in any field. The tribunal therefore found that the dismissal was not connected with membership of a reserved force, so section 48 did not disapply the qualifying period.

The complaint was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. No remedy hearing took place and no monetary award was made.