Case 4102867/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Rafferty v Represented by: Mr A Donnachie - Trade Union Representative Royal Mail Group Limited — 2019
- Case reference
- 4102867/2019
- Decision date
- 31 May 2019
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Laura Doherty
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Rafferty
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr R Rafferty, was dismissed by Royal Mail Group Ltd after an incident on 5 July 2018 in which he was found under the influence of alcohol at work and admitted drinking at home and on shift. The tribunal found that, at the time of dismissal, he was subject to two live conduct penalties, both alcohol-related, and that the respondent relied on repeated breaches of its Business Standards and Conduct Policy.
The tribunal held that the respondent had a genuine and reasonable belief in misconduct and had carried out a reasonable investigation and disciplinary process under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Burchell test. It accepted that the claimant attended fact-finding, conduct and appeal hearings with trade union representation, was given the relevant documentation, and was able to advance mitigation including long service, counselling, and alcohol treatment.
The tribunal considered the delay in forwarding the appeal paperwork and the fact that the dismissal decision was not delivered face-to-face, but found that neither point rendered the dismissal unfair. Applying the band of reasonable responses, it concluded that dismissal with notice was within the range of reasonable responses open to the employer. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the dismissal fair under section 98 ERA 1996 and dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
9 references- section 98 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Burchell test
- Sainsbury's Supermarket Ltd v Hitt
- Ice and Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones
- band of reasonable responses
- London Central Bus Co Ltd v Manning
- Westminster City Council v Cabaj
- Taylor v OCS Group Ltd
- Polkey v AE Dayton Services
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.