Miss R Shand v Quarriers — 2019

Miss R Shand brought a single claim of unfair dismissal against Quarriers. The tribunal found that the respondent accepted she had been dismissed, but held that the dismissal was not unfair. It identified the reason for dismissal as conduct: the claimant left her shift unexpectedly before the end of the shift and transferred service user J on her own in breach of the agreed 2:1 risk-assessed protocol. The allegation that colleagues smelled alcohol on her breath was not sustained, and lateness alone was not the reason for dismissal.

Applying section 98(4) ERA 1996 and the Burchell test, the tribunal held that Quarriers genuinely believed the misconduct had occurred, had reasonable grounds for that belief, and had carried out as much investigation as was reasonable. It relied on the claimant’s admissions, statements from colleagues, the investigation report, the rota, supervision records, the risk assessment for J, and the disciplinary and appeal notes. The tribunal accepted that the claimant had opportunities to explain her position during the disciplinary process, and that the explanation she later advanced about managing the shift was not put forward at the earlier stages.

The tribunal also considered the claimant’s case that depression, stress, or bullying by colleagues explained her conduct, but found the material before the respondent did not substantiate that account. It noted that managers had not been told of bullying, the supervision notes did not show a complaint of bullying or a need for support, and the return-to-work record after a nine-day absence with low mood did not indicate ongoing issues requiring adjustment. Taking account of the vulnerable service users and the care setting, the tribunal held that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses under Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones, and the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.