In person For the v Respondent — 2019

The tribunal dismissed the harassment claims said to relate to religion/belief and sex, and the direct discrimination claims based on religion/belief and sex. It found that the claimant had not proved the alleged comments, touching, photographs or WhatsApp videos, and it relied on inconsistencies in the claimant's accounts, the absence of independent evidence, and the lack of contemporaneous complaints. On the religious allegations, it also noted that several of the alleged incidents were said to have occurred on dates when the rosters showed the claimant was not at work.

On the dismissal claim, the tribunal held that the respondent's reason was conduct. It accepted that the important material was the May 2016 photographs showing the claimant with his trousers around his knees and his bare bottom exposed in the POD, and it found that the claimant had voluntarily pulled down his own trousers and exposed himself to colleagues. When the photographs came to management's attention in September 2017, British Airways investigated, suspended the claimant and progressed the matter through disciplinary hearings.

Applying the Burchell test and the band of reasonable responses test, the tribunal held that the investigation was reasonable and that summary dismissal for gross misconduct was within the reasonable range of responses. It dismissed the victimisation claim, finding that the only protected act was the claimant's 4 November 2016 email to Alastair Sykes about possible sex harassment, but that the suspension and dismissal were prompted by the photographs coming to light rather than by that complaint. The holiday pay and unlawful deduction of wages claims failed because the claimant had already taken all holiday due at termination, and the breach of contract claim failed because the conduct justified dismissal without notice.