Nursery worker dismissed for placing hand over child's face: CCTV evidence justified gross misconduct dismissal
A senior child care practitioner was fairly dismissed after CCTV showed her placing her hand over a three-year-old's face. The tribunal upheld the employer's decision, finding the investigation and dismissal were within the range of reasonable responses.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant placed her full hand over a 3-year-old child's face and pushed her head back, causing visible marks.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct after viewing CCTV footage and conducting an investigation.
- The claimant had over 20 years' childcare experience and a clean disciplinary record prior to this incident.
- The dismissing officer, Ms Blaney, had no prior knowledge of the claimant and made an independent decision.
- The claimant did not appeal the dismissal because she did not receive the dismissal letter sent by email.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a full-time senior child care practitioner at Little Pioneers nursery.
-
Flexible working request
Claimant requested flexible working; refused by Ms Williams in August 2021.
-
Verbal warning
Claimant received a verbal warning for shouting at Ms Williams and making threats.
-
Incident with child S
Claimant placed her hand over child S's face and pushed her head back, causing marks.
-
Parent complaint
S's mother reported finger marks and thumb print on S's face to the nursery.
-
Suspension
Claimant was suspended on full pay pending investigation into alleged safeguarding breach.
-
Investigation meeting
Claimant attended investigation meeting; shown CCTV footage.
-
Dismissal decision
Ms Blaney decided to dismiss claimant for gross misconduct; claimant informed by phone.
-
Dismissal letter sent
Dismissal letter emailed but not received by claimant; no postal copy sent.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented claim for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for misconduct was fair under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and whether the claimant's conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach justifying summary dismissal without notice.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims.
The key reasons were:
- The respondent genuinely believed the claimant had committed misconduct after viewing CCTV footage showing her placing her hand over a child's face.
- The respondent had reasonable grounds for that belief and carried out a reasonable investigation, including suspending the claimant, holding an investigation meeting, and giving her an opportunity to respond.
- The decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses for a senior childcare worker in a safeguarding role.
The claimant did not appeal the dismissal, and the tribunal noted that even if the dismissal letter was not received, the claimant was informed by phone and chose not to appeal.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers in safeguarding roles can rely on clear CCTV evidence to justify summary dismissal for gross misconduct.
- A failure to appeal the dismissal decision can weaken a claim of unfair dismissal, as it suggests the employee accepted the outcome.
- Even a long-serving employee with a clean record can be fairly dismissed if the misconduct is serious enough, especially in roles involving children.
- Employers should ensure dismissal letters are sent by a reliable method and consider following up if no response is received.
What this case shows
This case demonstrates how employment tribunals approach misconduct dismissals in safeguarding contexts. The claimant, a senior child care practitioner with over 20 years' experience and a clean disciplinary record, was dismissed after CCTV footage showed her placing her full hand over a three-year-old's face and pushing her head back, leaving visible marks. The tribunal accepted that the employer, The Midcounties Co-operative Limited, had a genuine belief in the misconduct based on clear evidence.
What the employer did right
The employer followed a structured process: suspending the claimant on full pay, conducting an investigation meeting where she was shown the CCTV, and having a separate dismissing officer make an independent decision. The tribunal noted that the dismissing officer had no prior knowledge of the claimant, which helped demonstrate impartiality. The employer's decision to treat the incident as gross misconduct was deemed reasonable given the safeguarding risks in a nursery setting.
Why the result matters
For employees in childcare or similar roles, this case reinforces that even a single incident of physical contact with a child can justify summary dismissal if it falls below expected standards. The tribunal emphasised that the employer's response was within the 'range of reasonable responses' – a key test in unfair dismissal claims. The claimant's failure to appeal also counted against her, as it suggested she did not challenge the decision internally. For employers, the case highlights the importance of having clear policies, conducting thorough investigations, and ensuring decision-makers are independent.
Similar cases
Refusing to return to work due to childcare: not a health and safety dismissal
An Engineering Manager who refused to return to work citing childcare commitments was not automatically unfairly dismissed for raising health and safety concerns. The tribunal found his principal reason for refusing was childcare, not Covid-19 fears.
Milk theft on CCTV: dismissal upheld as fair despite inconsistent explanations
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a milk delivery driver who was caught on CCTV removing milk from customers' doorsteps. The respondent's investigation and decision were within the range of reasonable responses.
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.
Headteacher dismissed for tapping her son's hand: unfair dismissal win after 17 years' service
A headteacher with 17 years' service was unfairly dismissed after tapping her 3-year-old son's hand to get his attention. The tribunal awarded £102,328.80, reduced by 20% for contributory fault.