Health and Safety – Forklift Truck Driver Sacked for Whistleblowing

Workplace whistleblowers operate very much in the public interest but, all too often, they are punished rather than praised for their activities. The point was made by the case of a veteran forklift truck driver who was summarily dismissed after repeatedly alerting his employer to a serious…

Jan 26, 2022

Pexels elevate 1267324 1024x683

Workplace whistleblowers operate very much in the public interest but, all too often, they are punished rather than praised for their activities. The point was made by the case of a veteran forklift truck driver who was summarily dismissed after repeatedly alerting his employer to a serious health and safety risk.

After witnessing an incident in which a pallet weighing up to 500 kg fell from a height of nine metres, the driver three times expressed concern to his employer that pallets were being overloaded. On the final occasion, he used his mobile phone to take photos of one such pallet and showed them to his supervisor.

He was first suspended and then dismissed on grounds that he had breached a strict company policy that banned employees from making mobile phone calls or sending texts on the shop floor. He launched Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings on the basis that he had been subjected to detriment for making protected disclosures – whistleblowing – and that his dismissal was therefore automatically unfair.

Upholding his complaint, the ET found that his whistleblowing was the real and principal reason for his dismissal. Acting in the public interest, he reasonably believed that the information he provided to the employer revealed a health and safety risk. Having taken his mobile phone briefly from his locker in order to take the photos, he had neither spoken to anyone on the device nor sent a text. By doing so, he used reasonable means to protect himself and fellow workers.

The ET also found that his dismissal amounted to a breach of contract and that the employer had failed in its obligation to pay him whilst he was suspended. If not agreed, the amount of his compensation would be assessed at a further hearing.

Asbestos Case Focuses on Chemistry Lab Heat Mats Phased Out 50 Years Ago

Anyone who worked in a chemistry lab or who was at school more than 50 years ago is likely to remember the ubiquitous asbestos mats on which Bunsen burners rested. In a sad case that vividly evoked the past, the High Court considered whether their presence can give rise to employer liability in the 21st century. The case concerned a man who worked as an NHS hospital lab technician between 1949 and 1960. He was 86 in 2019 when he was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a form of lung cancer almost…

Control Room Operator’s Angry Comment Lands Employer in Legal Hot Water

Angry comments uttered in a moment of workplace stress can very easily amount to harassment and land employers in legal hot water. That was certainly so in the case of a frustrated control room operator’s response to a Muslim worker’s reluctance to cover a shift during the Islamic festival of Eid. The operator, who worked for a security company, was under strain due to a staff shortage arising from the festival and was anxious to find a guard to cover a day shift. He contacted the worker, who…

Employers – Stamp Out Offensively Blokeish Behaviour or Pay the Price

When offensively blokeish behaviour in the workplace enters the realms of sexual harassment it is employers who are likely to carry the financial and reputational can. The point was powerfully made by a case concerning a female firefighter who was humiliated by male colleagues’ sexist comments. The woman claimed that she and three firemen were inside a fire engine, awaiting delivery of a takeaway meal, when the men began making assessments of female passers-by, commenting on whether they would…