Claimant v Summerhall Management Ltd — 2023

The claimant was employed as a Duty Manager from 1 September 2018 until 17 December 2021. She was suspended on 1 November 2021 after CCTV showed her consuming alcohol on duty on 29 October 2021, and the respondent also investigated allegations of bullying and harassment and timesheet fraud. The disciplinary process was carried out by an external HR consultant, Ciara McGovern, and the appeal was heard by Graham Main. The tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed for drinking on duty while carrying out the role of Duty Manager, and not because she had made protected disclosures.

On the whistleblowing issues, the tribunal found that the claimant did not make the alleged disclosure at the 15 November 2021 investigation meeting. It accepted, however, that she did make qualifying disclosures in her written statement of 22 November 2021, her further written statement of 7 December 2021, and at the disciplinary hearing on 14 December 2021, when she raised concerns about possible misappropriation of alcohol and overcharging by Izzy Almond and complained that there had been no proper investigation. The tribunal nevertheless found there was no evidence that Alex Lyon was upset or influenced by those disclosures, and no evidence that the disciplinary decision-maker was manipulated.

On ordinary unfair dismissal, the tribunal found that the respondent had a written alcohol policy prohibiting drinking on shift and warning that dismissal could follow depending on seriousness. It accepted that the claimant had recently been reminded of the policy after the Pickering's Gin Tour and had herself recently reminded another staff member that she could not drink on shift. The claimant admitted drinking on duty, the respondent treated that as misconduct, and the tribunal held that the investigation was reasonable in the circumstances even though the claimant had raised mitigation, including that she was upset and that the night was quiet. The tribunal also rejected arguments based on inconsistency of treatment, finding no sufficient evidence of comparable cases or awareness by senior management of any broader practice of staff drinking on shift.

The tribunal held that the disciplinary and appeal process was fair. The claimant was told the allegation could lead to dismissal, was offered accompaniment, was allowed to record meetings, and had opportunities to respond throughout. It found no unreasonable delay in the appeal, no unreasonable failure to follow the respondent's procedure or the ACAS Code, and no procedural irregularity that affected the overall fairness of the process. The appeal was dismissed on 25 March 2022. Because both claims failed, no monetary award was made.