Mr B Jenkins v Represented by Mr G Booth, Consultant Royal Mail Group Limited — 2021

Mr Bruce Jenkins was employed by Royal Mail as a Postman/Operational Postal Grade from 19 March 2001. The tribunal found that on 24 April 2020 he was driving a Royal Mail van when it collided with a white transit van. CCTV showed him getting out of the driver's side, walking behind the van and pausing at the point where the damage was located. The tribunal rejected his account that he did not realise a collision had occurred until later, and found that he knew of the RTC at the time and delayed reporting it for almost five hours. It also found that he had been driving with one headphone in and that he had previously been spoken to in 2019 about not wearing headphones at work.

Royal Mail relied on three gross misconduct allegations: failure to report the RTC as soon as possible, intentionally withholding the RTC information contrary to the Code of Business Standards, and wearing headphones while on duty and while driving. The tribunal held that each allegation was made out on the facts. It found that the respondent genuinely believed the claimant was guilty, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out a reasonable investigation. The tribunal applied sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, together with the Burchell approach, Iceland Frozen Foods, and Sainsburys v Hitt.

The tribunal identified one procedural concern at the disciplinary stage because Mr McGregor obtained further evidence from the other vehicle's driver after the hearing and the claimant had not seen that material before the dismissal decision. It held that the appeal, which was a complete rehearing before Mr Rankin, cured that defect because the new evidence was included in the appeal papers and the claimant had an opportunity to comment. Applying Taylor v OCS Group Limited, the tribunal concluded that the overall procedure was fair and that summary dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses given the deliberate breach of safety rules, the prior counselling about headphones, the delayed report, and the claimant's admissions. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed. The unauthorised deductions from wages claim had been withdrawn and was dismissed on withdrawal.