Ms M English v Represented by:10 Mr R Gilmour - Lay Representative Paul Cowan/PMS Leisure Services Ltd — 2024

The respondent did not lodge an ET3 and did not attend the hearing. The tribunal heard from the claimant, found her to be a credible and reliable witness, and accepted that she had worked for the respondent from February 2021 as a bar manager at The Portmann Hotel, on 20 contracted hours per week at £11.44 per hour, with additional hours sometimes paid in cash in hand.

The tribunal found that events began on 12 April 2024, when Mr Cowan told the claimant not to attend a shift and said she would in future work only her contracted hours. At a meeting on 15 April 2024 he said customers had made allegations to the landlord about her conduct, but gave no details. The claimant then contacted Oxford Inns, which told her it had received no customer complaints, and she later asked Mr Cowan for particulars. When she suffered a panic attack on 17 April 2024, her GP issued a fit note for work-related stress.

On 22 April 2024 Mr Cowan texted that she was being investigated for falsifying hours, being inebriated or under the influence of drugs while working, and selling drugs on the premises. On 1 May 2024 he invited her to a disciplinary hearing on allegations of gross misconduct by falsifying hours on 5 April 2024 and consuming controlled substances while acting as DPS, enclosing a timecard and a staff statement that referred to drinking on duty and lateness but not to drugs. The claimant asked for the start and finish times alleged, CCTV, and the employee handbook, but she was not provided with the requested material.

The dismissal letter of 10 May 2024 said she had been found guilty of gross misconduct by falsifying hours on 5 April 2024 and 26 March 2024. The tribunal held that the dismissal was unfair because the respondent dismissed her for different reasons from those put to her, failed to give her essential information or a fair opportunity to answer the allegations, conducted no reasonable investigation, and could not have had a genuine belief on reasonable grounds that she had committed the misconduct alleged. It also found a failure to follow the Acas Code of Practice and applied a 25% uplift to the compensatory award. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £1,029.60, a compensatory award of £10,362.32 made up of past loss, future loss, pension loss, loss of statutory rights, and the uplift, and noted that the recoupment regulations applied with a prescribed element of £5,162.35 and a balance of £6,229.57.