Ms A Fadipe (Counsel) (3rd and 4th August 2023) Mr McCarthy in person (30th November and 1st December 2023) For the v Respondent — 2023

Mr McCarthy, an electrician employed from 3 February 2018, moved to Merton and later worked nights on a flexible basis. The judgment records earlier pay errors, including a December 2021 correction and a further grievance outcome on 12 April 2022 when Mr Wood said a backdated payment of £2,962.04 would be made. The ET1 also mentioned age and race discrimination, but those complaints had already been ruled out of jurisdiction and were not determined in this judgment.

The dismissal arose from Mr McCarthy leaving work early on 7 to 10 March 2022. The tribunal found the Respondent genuinely believed he had committed misconduct, but held it was unreasonable to treat that conduct as sufficient reason to dismiss him. It accepted that Mr McCarthy consistently said he left early because he was tired and struggling to adjust to nights, against a background of overtime, staff shortages, and refused leave. The tribunal also found a reasonable employer would have considered whether he had made up time by arriving early, and noted that the Respondent’s position on the alleged agreement with Mr Stevens changed during the process.

On wrongful dismissal, the tribunal found Mr McCarthy’s contract entitled him to four weeks’ notice and that he was dismissed without notice. Applying its own assessment of gross misconduct, it held this was not a case justifying summary dismissal. The complaint of unauthorised deduction from wages was dismissed because Mr McCarthy could not particularise the amount or period claimed, and the tribunal found the Respondent had already resolved the pay errors identified in the evidence. No monetary tribunal award is set out in the judgment.