Apprentice bricklayer dismissed for mobile phone use on scaffolding: no investigation, unfair dismissal
An apprentice bricklayer was unfairly dismissed after using his mobile phone on scaffolding. The tribunal found the employer failed to carry out any investigation or disciplinary hearing.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #mobile-phone-use
- #scaffolding
- #health-and-safety
- #contributory-conduct
- #no-appeal
- #polkey-zero
Key facts
- The claimant used his mobile phone on scaffolding and ignored his foreman's instructions to put it away.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct without holding a disciplinary hearing or investigation.
- The tribunal found that mobile phone use on site was common and no other worker had been dismissed for it.
- The claimant was not informed of any right to appeal the dismissal.
- The tribunal found a 0% chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed if a fair procedure had been followed.
- The claimant's conduct contributed 50% to his dismissal.
Timeline
-
Employment start
Claimant started employment as an apprentice bricklayer via Craven College.
-
Incident on scaffolding
Claimant used mobile phone on scaffolding, ignored foreman's instructions, and used foul language.
-
Decision to dismiss
Director Mr Foster decided to dismiss the claimant later that afternoon after speaking with colleagues.
-
Claimant attempts meeting
Claimant attended office and messaged Mr Foster to arrange a meeting, but no meeting was facilitated.
-
Dismissal letter sent
Claimant received letter of termination for gross misconduct, effective from 6 May 2021.
-
Preliminary hearing
Directions given for final hearing to decide liability and remedy.
-
Final hearing day 1
Tribunal heard evidence from claimant and respondent witnesses.
-
Final hearing day 2
Tribunal concluded evidence and reserved judgment.
-
Reserved judgment
Tribunal found unfair dismissal, 0% Polkey reduction, 50% contributory fault.
-
Remedy hearing
Tribunal awarded £1,939.44 total compensation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer acted reasonably in dismissing the claimant for gross misconduct without a fair procedure, and whether the claimant contributed to his dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair. The employer had no reasonable grounds for believing the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct because there was no investigation or disciplinary hearing.
Compensation was reduced by 50% because the claimant's conduct contributed to his dismissal. The total award was £1,939.44.
- Basic award: £0 (not applicable due to length of service?)
- Compensatory award: reduced by 50% for contributory fault
- Polkey reduction: 0%
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must carry out a reasonable investigation and hold a disciplinary hearing before dismissing for gross misconduct.
- A single incident of mobile phone use on site may not justify dismissal if it is common practice and no other employee has been dismissed for it.
- Employees should be informed of any right to appeal a dismissal decision.
- Contributory conduct can reduce compensation even if the dismissal is unfair.
This case shows what can happen when an employer jumps to dismissal without following basic procedures. The apprentice bricklayer was dismissed the same day he used his mobile phone on scaffolding and argued with his foreman. The employer decided to dismiss without any investigation or disciplinary hearing, and did not tell the claimant he could appeal.
What the employer did wrong
The tribunal found that mobile phone use on site was common and no other worker had been dismissed for it. The employer should have investigated the incident, given the claimant a chance to explain, and considered whether dismissal was a reasonable response. By failing to do so, the employer acted outside the range of reasonable responses.
Why the result matters
This case is a reminder that even in health and safety contexts, employers must follow a fair process. The tribunal also found that the claimant would not have been dismissed even if a fair procedure had been followed, so no Polkey reduction applied. However, the claimant's conduct contributed 50% to his dismissal, reducing his compensation.
The total award of £1,939.44 reflects the limited financial loss of an apprentice, but the principle is clear: no shortcut to dismissal without a proper hearing.
Similar cases
Train operator dismissed for opening doors on wrong side: unfair but no compensation
A tribunal found London Underground unfairly dismissed a train operator with 11 years' service for opening doors on the wrong side, but awarded no compensation because a fair process would have reached the same outcome.
Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.
Dismissed over a private Facebook post: when does social media cross the line?
A care worker was sacked for gross misconduct after a Facebook comment about a colleague. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair — but reduced compensation by 25% for contributory conduct.
Control room team leader dismissed over hug and anti-Semitism allegations: unfair but compensation slashed
A tribunal found that MTR Elizabeth Line unfairly dismissed a control room team leader of 11 years over a hug and alleged anti-Semitic comments, but reduced compensation by 75% due to his own conduct.