(sitting alone)5 Mr Scott McCallie v Represented by: Mr G Singh – Solicitor Colin Boyd — 2023

Mr Scott McCallie was employed by the respondent as a slater's labourer from 6 December 2021 until his employment ended on 2 May 2022. He alleged that he had made two protected disclosures: first, about an incorrect figure of £3,873.60 being included in his P60 and payslip, and secondly, about overcharging of a customer on the "Quadrant job". The respondent denied that any protected disclosures had been made and said the dismissal was for lack of work.

The tribunal preferred the evidence of the respondent and the accountant, GS, over the claimant's evidence. It accepted that the P60 contained an error because DWP benefits had been wrongly included as taxable gross income, that the claimant raised the issue on 4 April 2022, and that GS offered to correct the P60. However, the tribunal found that this was a query about money being "missing from my income" rather than a disclosure of payroll mismanagement, and it did not accept the claimant's evidence that he had made the broader allegation he later advanced.

On the alleged overcharging issue, the tribunal accepted that the respondent had quoted and invoiced Mr S Walls £2,600 for the relevant work and received £2,600 in payment. It found that the claimant's text of 7 April 2022 referred to the respondent charging more for him on some jobs, not to overcharging customers, and it rejected the suggestion that a protected disclosure had been made in person. The tribunal described the overcharging case as contrived and found that the claimant's account was inconsistent.

Having found that the alleged disclosures were not made as claimed, the tribunal held that the claimant's section 103A ERA 1996 claim failed. It also found, on the evidence of the 2 May 2022 telephone conversation and the surrounding circumstances, that the reason or principal reason for dismissal was lack of work and the respondent's back problems. The claim was therefore dismissed and no remedy was awarded.