Mrs D Haughian v Advance Cleaning Solutions — 2023

The tribunal found that the claimant, Mrs D Haughian, was dismissed because of her conduct after an outburst directed at a colleague, VL, on 28 September 2022. It accepted that the respondent had a potentially fair reason for dismissal under s.98 ERA 1996, and that there was a genuine and reasonable belief in misconduct because the claimant admitted what she had said. The tribunal also found that the respondent took reasonable steps to investigate the incident, but that was not the end of the fairness question.

The dismissal was held unfair because the respondent did not progress beyond fact-finding into any disciplinary process. The claimant was never clearly told that her job was at risk, was not invited to explain her actions or offer mitigation, and there was no meeting in person or equivalent hearing before dismissal was decided. The tribunal found that the respondent failed to meet the requirements of the ACAS Code and that the later appeal did not cure the procedural defect, because the appeal response was effectively a repeat of the dismissal letter.

Although the dismissal was unfair, the tribunal found that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses given the seriousness of the claimant's offensive language and the distress caused to VL. It also found that there was a very high probability the claimant would have been dismissed even after a fair process, and that her own culpable conduct wholly caused the dismissal. On remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £1,638, calculated as 9 weeks' pay at £182 per week. It found loss of wages of £327.60 and £350 for loss of accrued statutory rights, but the compensatory element was reduced to nil and no compensatory award was made.