Mr Michael O’Neill v Poundland Limited — 2022

The claimant was dismissed for misconduct after the respondent concluded that he had amended Kronos time records so that they did not reflect the actual times he was at work. The tribunal found that the respondent had a genuine belief in the claimant's guilt, based on Kronos records, CCTV and the claimant's admissions that he had amended his times.

The tribunal accepted that there were flaws or limits in the process, including an incorrect reference to a non-existent Kronos policy, limited investigation of whether the practice was common, limited investigation of the claimant's requests for support, and an error concerning financial loss. It found that the policy error was corrected at appeal, that the other investigative points were not material to the reason for dismissal, and that the investigation as a whole was reasonable.

The tribunal found that summary dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses. It took account of the claimant's long unblemished service and promotion history, but concluded that the respondent acted reasonably in treating the amendment of Kronos records as gross misconduct, given its implications for payment, staff safety, trust and the claimant's managerial role. The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.