Mark Retter v Morrisons Utility Services Ltd — 2020

Mr Retter was dismissed after an incident on 28 March 2019 in which, during a dispute with a subordinate, he said words to the effect that they should go outside and sort it out. The tribunal found that the sole reason for dismissal was that altercation, and rejected any suggestion of an ulterior motive. It also found that the investigation and appeal process were fair: relevant witnesses were interviewed, Mr Retter had notice and documents, he was accompanied, and the appeal officer’s post-hearing enquiries made no difference to the outcome.

Applying section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the tribunal held that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. It accepted that Mr Retter had long service, positive appraisals, no disciplinary record, and had been provoked, but gave greater weight to the fact that he was a senior manager, the exchange took place in front of others, the words could only be understood as a prelude to a physical confrontation, and the situation was defused by his own line manager rather than by Mr Retter. The tribunal also relied on the respondent’s disciplinary and dignity at work policies, which treated such conduct as gross misconduct, and on the fact that Mr Retter had recent management training.

The tribunal said it would not itself have dismissed Mr Retter, but concluded that this did not make the dismissal unfair. It considered that management failings in the workplace culture and the respondent’s decision not to sanction the other employee did not outweigh the accepted facts of the incident itself. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.