In Person For the v P Nainthy (solicitor) — 2022

Zakaree Gibbs, a mechanic for Babcock Critical Services Limited, brought a claim of unfair dismissal and also pursued notice pay and holiday pay claims. At the hearing he said he was no longer pursuing holiday pay, and before the end of the first day the notice pay claim was also withdrawn. The tribunal therefore recorded both of those claims as withdrawn.

On the unfair dismissal claim, the tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was conduct within s.98(2)(b) ERA 1996. It rejected the claimant's case that he had been targeted because he supported colleagues in their tribunal claims, finding that no one involved in the dismissal decision was shown to have known about those statements.

Applying s.98(4) ERA 1996 and the Burchell line of authority, the tribunal found that the respondent had a genuine belief in misconduct on reasonable grounds and after a reasonable investigation. It relied on the claimant's admitted refusal to have his temperature taken on 22 September 2020, his admitted refusal on 8 October 2020 to complete the paperwork instruction as given, and the live first written warning arising from the earlier overalls incident. The tribunal also rejected the allegation that Martin Audis was biased, finding no evidence that his prior involvement as appeal manager rendered the later disciplinary process unreasonable.

The tribunal concluded that dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. It accepted that relevant witnesses had been interviewed, the claimant had been accompanied and could appeal, and Mr Audis was entitled to take account of the existing warning and the two upheld incidents when deciding on dismissal. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed, and no monetary award was made.