A Finding of Unfair Dismissal Does Not Always Result in Compensation

An award of compensation might be thought to follow a finding of unfair dismissal as surely as night follows day. However, as a case concerning a care worker accused of stealing money from a vulnerable client showed, that is not always the case.

The worker had, on three occasions, used…

Feb 10, 2023

Nick pampoukidis t uv1rzqpuy unsplash 1024x685

An award of compensation might be thought to follow a finding of unfair dismissal as surely as night follows day. However, as a case concerning a care worker accused of stealing money from a vulnerable client showed, that is not always the case.

The worker had, on three occasions, used ATMs to withdraw a total of £800 from the client’s bank account. She was adamant that she had been told to do so by the client, to whom she had handed over the money. She was investigated by the police but was not prosecuted. Following a disciplinary hearing, however, her employer dismissed her on grounds of gross misconduct.

In subsequently upholding her unfair dismissal complaint, an Employment Tribunal (ET) identified a number of procedural failings in the disciplinary process. Amongst other things, there was no adequate investigation of her alleged wrongdoing. She was deprived of a fair opportunity to put her case in that the disciplinary hearing, rather than being adjourned as it should have been, was held in her absence.

In refusing to award her any compensation, however, the ET found that the employer had reasonable grounds for concluding, on the balance of probabilities, that she had indeed committed theft. Even had the disciplinary process been entirely fair, the ET ruled that her dismissal would have been inevitable.

Rejecting her challenge to that outcome, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) acknowledged that it was unusual for a finding of unfair dismissal to result in no award of compensation. However, the ET had approached the evidence with common sense and was entitled to reach the conclusion it did.

The EAT considered whether she might have kept her job if she had been given the opportunity to put forward her mitigation. A single mother of three children, she had an otherwise clean, 10-year service record and her dismissal was likely to mark the end of her professional career. However, the EAT was satisfied that those matters would have made no difference to the outcome. The ET’s decision to reduce her compensation to zero was really unassailable.

Disability Discrimination – ET’s Reasons for Dismissing Claim ‘Inadequate’

One of the most fundamental principles of justice is that unsuccessful litigants must be given an adequate explanation of the reasons why they have lost. In the context of a disability discrimination claim, an Employment Tribunal (ET) was found to have failed in that basic task. The case concerned a probationary employee who suffered from medical conditions that amounted to a disability. She was dismissed, purportedly due to performance issues. She launched a direct discrimination claim on the…

Whistleblowing and the Importance of Proving Motive – Guideline Ruling

Establishing that an employee has made a protected disclosure is the first step on the path to success in any whistleblowing claim. However, as a case concerning a dismissed care homes manager showed, it is often much harder to prove that detrimental treatment is motivated by such a disclosure. The woman had been in post for only about six months when she was dismissed at the end of her probationary period. Her employer asserted that she was dismissed on grounds of capability or performance.…

How to Conduct a Fair Redundancy Exercise – Guideline EAT Ruling

A redundancy process in which a decision to dismiss is effectively taken in advance of consulting an affected employee will almost never be fair. The point was made by the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) in the case of a nurse who was selected for redundancy solely because her fixed-term contract was shortly due to expire. The nurse worked in a research unit that was losing money and needed to shed staff. She was selected for redundancy for no other reason than that her contract was coming up…