Security guard dismissed for lack of availability: a reasonable response to chronic low attendance
A security guard who worked only six shifts in 12 months was fairly dismissed for lack of availability, but the tribunal awarded him £790.70 for unpaid notice and holiday pay.
2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #security-guard
- #lone-parent
- #childcare-responsibilities
- #sosr
- #wrongful-dismissal
- #holiday-pay
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a security guard from 2016.
- The claimant had a young daughter and was involved in a custody battle.
- The claimant worked only 6 shifts in the 12 months before dismissal.
- The respondent accommodated the claimant's availability for two days per week.
- The claimant was dismissed for some other substantial reason due to lack of availability.
- The respondent conceded liability for notice pay and holiday pay.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a security guard.
-
Daughter born
Claimant's daughter was born, leading to childcare responsibilities.
-
Warning letter sent
Respondent wrote to claimant expressing concern about attendance and warning of possible termination.
-
TUPE transfer
Claimant's employment transferred from Cordant to Bidvest Noonan.
-
Administrative dismissal error
Claimant was mistakenly dismissed but reinstated shortly after.
-
Missed shift
Claimant missed a shift, stating he had not confirmed it.
-
Invitation to dismissal meeting
Respondent invited claimant to a meeting to discuss his attendance.
-
Dismissal meeting
Claimant was dismissed for some other substantial reason.
-
Dismissal letter
Claimant received written confirmation of dismissal.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal heard by Mr M Thompson.
-
Appeal outcome
Appeal dismissed.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed when his employer said his lack of availability made the employment relationship unsustainable, and whether his dismissal amounted to sex discrimination because of his childcare responsibilities.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim? No, it did not. The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the employer had a fair reason (some other substantial reason – lack of availability) and acted reasonably in dismissing. However, the employer conceded that the claimant was entitled to notice pay and holiday pay, which had not been paid. The total award was £790.70, comprising:
- £667.50 for wrongful dismissal (notice pay)
- £123.20 for holiday pay
The sex discrimination claim was also dismissed because the claimant did not provide a suitable comparator or evidence of less favourable treatment.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you are a lone parent with childcare responsibilities, your employer must not treat you less favourably than a similar employee of the opposite sex – but you need a real comparator to prove discrimination.
- Chronic low attendance can be a fair reason for dismissal even if you have a good reason for it, as long as the employer follows a fair process.
- Even if you lose your main claim, you may still be entitled to unpaid notice pay and holiday pay – check your contract and employment rights.
- Being a litigant in person can be challenging; failure to disclose documents in time can harm your case.
A story of balancing work and family
The claimant, a security guard with six years' service, had a young daughter and was involved in a custody battle. Over the 12 months before his dismissal, he worked only six shifts. His employer, Bidvest Noonan (UK) Ltd, had tried to accommodate him by offering two days per week, but his availability remained extremely limited. After a warning letter and a meeting, the employer decided that the employment relationship was no longer sustainable and dismissed him for 'some other substantial reason' (SOSR) – lack of availability.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal accepted that the claimant's childcare responsibilities were genuine, but it found that the employer had acted reasonably. The employer had followed a fair process: it wrote to the claimant, held a meeting, considered his explanation, and offered an appeal. The tribunal concluded that the decision to dismiss fell within the 'range of reasonable responses' that a reasonable employer might take. The sex discrimination claim failed because the claimant did not provide evidence of how a hypothetical female comparator would have been treated differently.
What the employer did wrong
Although the dismissal was fair, the employer conceded that it had failed to pay the claimant his notice pay and accrued holiday pay. This is a common oversight: even when dismissing fairly, employers must honour contractual and statutory entitlements. The tribunal ordered Bidvest Noonan to pay £667.50 for notice pay and £123.20 for holiday pay – a total of £790.70.
What this means for similar claims
This case shows that employers can fairly dismiss employees who are persistently unavailable, even for good reasons like childcare, provided they follow a fair procedure. However, employees in similar situations should check whether their employer has made reasonable adjustments or considered alternatives. For lone parents, a sex discrimination claim is difficult without a real comparator – but it is not impossible if there is evidence of less favourable treatment based on sex. The key takeaway: keep records of all communications, and ensure your employer pays you everything you are owed when you leave.
Similar cases
Cleaner with 7 years' service dismissed without any redundancy process: bowling club found liable
A cleaner was unfairly dismissed when a bowling club committee decided to let her go without notice or any redundancy procedure. The tribunal awarded £7,252 in compensation, including an ACAS uplift for failing to follow the statutory code.
Cleaner dismissed during Covid-19: employer's failure to respond leads to £2,719 payout
A part-time cleaner who was dismissed after asking to be furloughed has won her unfair dismissal claim after her employer failed to submit a response to the tribunal.
Senior managers dismissed without investigation: unfair and wrongful dismissal
Five senior managers were summarily dismissed for gross misconduct without any investigation or appeal. The tribunal found the dismissals unfair and wrongful, and awarded unpaid wages, holiday pay, and notice pay.
Barber's assistant dismissed while signed off sick: no procedure, no fairness
A barber's assistant who was dismissed by text message while on sick leave has won £16,840 in compensation for unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, holiday pay and sick pay.