Case 4100406/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Member J Lindsay Tribunal Member G McKay Mr M Harkness v McDonald’s Restaurants Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 4100406/2020
- Decision date
- 26 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Jones
- Venue
- Edinburgh
- Panel members
- J Lindsay, G McKay
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Member J Lindsay Tribunal Member G McKay Mr M Harkness
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Harkness worked as a Crew Member at the respondent's Galashiels restaurant from 6 February 2015 until his dismissal on 27 October 2019. The tribunal found that he had a long history of mental health issues and absences recorded as depression, received written warnings in 2017, raised a concern on 24 February 2018 about out-of-date buns, and was later reinstated after successfully appealing an earlier dismissal. It also found that the respondent then held a series of review meetings, discussed shift patterns and adjustments, and obtained occupational health advice.
The occupational health report dated 26 March 2019 said he was unfit for work, that no adjustments would enable a return, and that a sustained return date could not be identified. At later health review meetings the claimant said he did not want to come back to work and asked for a settlement. Ms Temple dismissed him for capability on 23 October 2019, the dismissal was confirmed on 29 October 2019, and the appeal was rejected on 3 December 2019. The tribunal found that capability was the reason, and the only reason, for dismissal; that Ms Temple made the decision; and that the procedure was fair and the outcome within the band of reasonable responses.
The protected-disclosure claim failed because the tribunal found no evidence that the February 2018 complaint about buns influenced the dismissal, noting the time gap and the absence of any involvement by Ms Temple. The disability discrimination claim under s.15 Equality Act 2010 also failed: although the tribunal accepted that the dismissal was something arising from disability, it held that requiring employees to attend work was a legitimate aim and that dismissal was proportionate in the circumstances because there was no realistic prospect of return and no other action the respondent could take. All claims were dismissed and no award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was capability, held that the procedure was fair, and concluded the decision was within the band of reasonable responses. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The automatically unfair dismissal claim under s.103A ERA based on the February 2018 disclosure about out-of-date buns failed because the tribunal found no causal link and no evidence that Ms Temple was influenced by the disclosure. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal accepted that the absences arose from disability but held that dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of requiring employees to attend work. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- s.98(2)(a) ERA 1996
- s.98(4) ERA 1996
- s.103A ERA 1996
- s.43B ERA 1996
- s.15(1) Equality Act 2010
- band of reasonable responses
- S v Dundee City Council [2013] CSIH 91
- O'Brien v Bolton St Catherine's Academy [2017] ICR 737
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.