Claimant v Lillie v E. ON UK plc — 2022

The claimant, Mrs V Lillie, was dismissed by E.ON UK plc following an investigation and disciplinary process concerning alleged call avoidance, work avoidance, and a separate allegation of unacceptable behaviour. The tribunal recorded that the respondent investigated the matter using interviews, system data, call records and a spreadsheet of evidence, and that the claimant was interviewed and later attended a disciplinary hearing with a trade union representative. The disciplinary officer concluded that the allegations were founded and summarily dismissed her on 25 August 2021; the appeal officer later revoked the finding on unacceptable behaviour, but upheld the rest of the decision.

The tribunal found that the respondent held a genuine belief that the claimant had committed misconduct and rejected the suggestion, raised at the outset of the hearing, that the dismissal was really to avoid a redundancy payment. It found there were reasonable grounds for the belief, based on the evidence gathered over more than a month, including statistics from calling systems, interviews, and analysis of 34 complaints. The tribunal also found that the respondent had carried out a reasonable investigation and had not acted with a closed mind, noting that it continued to consider the claimant's explanations at disciplinary and appeal stages.

Applying section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the guidance in Burchell and Foley, the tribunal held that the procedure was within the band of reasonable responses. It rejected the argument that the respondent had applied a broad brush approach or that every document needed to be individually addressed, and it found no procedural unfairness in the way the call and work avoidance allegations were considered together with the separate conduct allegation. The tribunal also accepted that the respondent considered mitigation, including the claimant's length of service and previous record, but was entitled to conclude that dismissal was the appropriate sanction for the upheld misconduct findings.

The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed in full. No remedy award was made because the claim failed.