Bus driver dismissed for failing to stop at white bus stop: a fair conduct dismissal
A bus driver who twice failed to service the first stop on his route was fairly dismissed, the Watford Employment Tribunal has ruled. No compensation was awarded.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #bus-driver
- #cctv-evidence
- #final-written-warning
- #misconduct
- #passenger-complaints
- #white-bus-stop
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a bus driver from 16 March 2013 to 22 November 2016.
- He was dismissed for misconduct after failing to service the first bus stop on route 350 at Heathrow Terminal 5 on two occasions.
- At the time of dismissal, the claimant had a live final written warning for using a mobile phone while in the cab.
- CCTV evidence showed the claimant did not stop at the white bus stop and there were passengers waiting.
- The respondent had a reasonable belief in the misconduct and carried out a fair investigation.
Timeline
-
First written warning
The claimant received a first written warning for failing to extend the ramp for a wheelchair user.
-
Final written warning
The claimant received a final written warning for using a mobile phone while in the cab.
-
First incident at Terminal 5
The claimant failed to stop at the first bus stop on route 350; three passengers were waiting on the bench.
-
Second incident at Terminal 5
The claimant again failed to stop at the first bus stop; a passenger was seen walking towards the stop.
-
Resignation and withdrawal
The claimant resigned under pressure but withdrew his resignation, which the respondent accepted.
-
Disciplinary hearing and dismissal
The claimant was dismissed for misconduct with notice.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented his claim of unfair dismissal to the tribunal.
-
Hearing day 1
The tribunal heard evidence and submissions.
-
Hearing day 2
The tribunal concluded the hearing.
-
Judgment sent
The judgment dismissing the claim was sent to the parties.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for misconduct was fair, considering whether the employer had a genuine belief in the misconduct, reasonable grounds, a fair investigation, and whether dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim.
- The employer had a reasonable belief in the misconduct based on clear CCTV evidence showing the claimant failed to stop at the white bus stop on two occasions.
- The investigation and disciplinary process were fair; the claimant had a live final written warning for using a mobile phone in the cab, which was valid.
- No compensation was awarded as the dismissal was fair.
Lessons & takeaways
- A live final written warning can make dismissal for a further misconduct more likely to be fair, even if the new misconduct alone might not justify dismissal.
- Clear CCTV evidence can strongly support an employer's reasonable belief in misconduct.
- Employees should ensure any appeal against a previous warning is pursued to conclusion; failing to do so may weaken a later challenge to the warning's validity.
- Employers should have clear rules about bus stop types (e.g., white stops) and ensure drivers are aware of them.
What this case shows
This case illustrates how a bus driver's failure to follow a specific rule—servicing a 'white' bus stop—led to a fair dismissal, particularly because he already had a live final written warning. The claimant had been warned for using a mobile phone in the cab, and the employer had a zero-tolerance policy on that. The two incidents of failing to stop at the first stop at Heathrow Terminal 5, captured on CCTV, were seen as a further breach of trust.
What the employer did right
Abellio London Ltd conducted a thorough investigation, viewing the CCTV footage at the disciplinary hearing and on appeal. The tribunal noted that the employer had a genuine belief in the misconduct, reasonable grounds, and followed a fair process. The claimant's attempt to challenge the validity of the final written warning failed because he had not pursued his appeal against the earlier warning at the time.
Why the result matters
This decision confirms that employers can dismiss for a series of misconducts, especially when a final written warning is in place. It also highlights the importance of employees pursuing any grievances or appeals promptly. For transport operators, clear rules about mandatory stops (like white stops) are essential, and CCTV evidence can be decisive in misconduct hearings.
Similar cases
Bus driver dismissed after aggressive phone call: conduct dismissal upheld
A bus driver with two years' service was fairly dismissed for making an aggressive phone call to a controller while on a final written warning. The tribunal rejected his claims of race discrimination and victimisation.
Bus driver dismissed after driving onto pavement to overtake: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 13 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after driving onto a pavement to overtake another bus. The tribunal rejected claims of race and religious discrimination.
Installation engineer dismissed for fuelling personal car with company credit card
An installation engineer who used his employer's credit card to fuel his personal car on three occasions was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct, the tribunal has ruled.
18-year bar staff member dismissed after final warning: tribunal upholds conduct dismissal
An employment tribunal found that Meanwood Conservative Club acted fairly when it dismissed a bar worker with 18 years' service for failing to improve her attitude towards the club secretary, following a final written warning.