Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Claimant, Mr. J Amos, a GMB union representative employed by Asda Stores Limited from 2012 until 2017, was dismissed for gross misconduct following an incident on 10 February 2017. While off-duty, he entered the staff canteen, consumed alcohol, and became threatening and abusive toward a security guard and night trading manager, prompting police to remove him. The tribunal found his dismissal fair under normal principles, citing reasonable investigation, belief in misconduct, and no remorse. His claims of unfair dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal (based on union activities) were rejected, as the decision was deemed within the range of reasonable responses.
Issues
- The tribunal examined whether the Respondent's stated reason for dismissal (gross misconduct) was valid. The Claimant contended the real reason was his union activities, but the tribunal found this claim unconvincing.
- The Claimant also argued his dismissal was unfair under normal principles, asserting it was too harsh given the circumstances. The tribunal evaluated this claim alongside the disciplinary process and employer's response.
- The tribunal considered whether the Claimant's dismissal was automatically unfair under section 152 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, as he claimed he was dismissed for carrying out union representative activities. The Respondent maintained the dismissal was for gross misconduct, not union-related activities.
- The tribunal applied the Burchell principles to determine if dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The employer cited threatening behavior and lack of remorse, which the tribunal accepted as valid grounds.
- The tribunal assessed the fairness of the disciplinary procedure, including investigation, witness statements, and the Claimant's refusal to engage. The process followed proper steps with no bias detected against union activities.
Holdings
- The ordinary unfair dismissal claim failed as the tribunal determined the employer had a reasonable belief in the claimant's misconduct and the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The disciplinary process was deemed fair, with no procedural faults identified.
- The tribunal found the employer's disciplinary process to be reasonable and properly conducted. The investigation and decision-making were supported by witness statements and the claimant's own admission of being unable to confirm or deny the evidence, which justified reliance on the witnesses' accounts.
- The tribunal dismissed the claim of automatically unfair dismissal under section 152 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations Act 1992, finding no evidence that the dismissal was due to the claimant's trade union activities. The claimant's presence in the canteen and subsequent threatening behavior were determined to be unrelated to union representation.
Remedies
The Claimant's claims of unfair dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal fail and are dismissed.
Legal Principles
The tribunal applied section 152 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, which establishes that dismissal for engaging in trade union activities is automatically unfair. It also considered the Burchell principles (BHS v Burchell [1980] ICR 303) to assess the fairness of the dismissal under normal unfair dismissal criteria, including reasonable investigation, belief in misconduct, and proportionality of the dismissal as a response.
Precedent Name
BHS v Burchell
Cited Statute
Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
Judge Name
Anstis
Passage Text
- The Claimant's claims of unfair dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal fail and are dismissed.
- The remaining point is whether the decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses... She told me that she viewed his behaviour on that night as amounting to 'threatening behaviour' under the terms of the Respondent's policies and that he had shown no remorse for what had occurred.
- The Respondent says that the reason for dismissal was misconduct, and I find that to be correct.