Dismissed after raising Covid safety fears: a health and safety case
An administrator who raised concerns about inadequate Covid-19 safety measures was unfairly dismissed. The tribunal awarded £33,571 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant worked as an Administrator from 1 August 2017 to 16 September 2020.
- The claimant signed a furlough agreement on 3 April 2020 but continued to work full-time in the office.
- The respondent failed to provide adequate Covid-19 safety measures such as masks, hand sanitisers, and social distancing.
- On 3 September 2020, the claimant left work after raising health and safety concerns about a colleague with Covid-like symptoms.
- The claimant was dismissed after a hostile meeting on 16 September 2020 and was not paid his full wages.
- The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed for health and safety reasons and awarded compensation.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working as an Administrator for the respondent.
-
National lockdown announced
The UK entered lockdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
-
Furlough agreement signed
The claimant signed a furlough agreement, but continued to work full-time in the office.
-
Health and safety concerns raised
The claimant raised concerns about a colleague coughing and lack of safety measures, then left work.
-
Meeting and dismissal
The claimant attended a meeting where Mr Dhinjan insulted him and threw his watch. He was told to go home and later asked to return company property.
-
Return of property
The claimant returned office keys, laptop, and printer to Mr Dhinjan.
-
Claimant's email to respondent
The claimant emailed Mr and Mrs Dhinjan seeking a return to work and payment of wages.
-
Further email from claimant
The claimant emailed again, threatening tribunal action for unpaid wages.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
The claimant filed claims for unfair dismissal, health and safety detriment, and unauthorised deductions.
-
Final hearing (first day)
The tribunal heard evidence and refused the respondent's postponement application.
-
Reserved judgment issued
The tribunal found all claims well-founded and listed a remedy hearing.
-
Remedy hearing
The tribunal awarded total compensation of £33,571.17 plus costs.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the administrator was unfairly dismissed and suffered detriments because he raised health and safety concerns about Covid-19, and whether the employer made unauthorised deductions by paying only 80% of his salary while he worked full-time during furlough.
The outcome
The tribunal found all claims well-founded: unfair dismissal, health and safety detriment, health and safety dismissal, and unauthorised deductions from wages.
Key reasons:
- The administrator raised genuine concerns about a colleague with Covid-like symptoms and lack of safety measures.
- The employer responded with hostility, insulting him and throwing his watch, then dismissed him.
- The employer failed to pay full wages despite the administrator working full-time during furlough.
Compensation:
- Basic award: £1,329.60
- Compensatory award: £23,219.05
- Total: £33,571.17 (including other elements)
Lessons & takeaways
- Raising genuine health and safety concerns about Covid-19 is protected – dismissing an employee for doing so is automatically unfair.
- If you are furloughed but continue to work full-time, you are entitled to full pay, not just 80%.
- Employers should take health and safety concerns seriously and provide a safe workplace, especially during a pandemic.
- Keep evidence of your concerns and any hostile reactions – it can be crucial in tribunal.
A case of speaking up during the pandemic
This case shows what can happen when an employee raises legitimate health and safety concerns during a public health crisis. The administrator, who had worked for the company for three years, was worried about a colleague showing Covid-like symptoms and the lack of basic safety measures like masks and hand sanitiser. When he raised these concerns, the employer's response was hostile: he was insulted, his watch was thrown, and he was effectively dismissed.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have avoided this outcome by taking the concerns seriously. A proper risk assessment, provision of PPE, and a calm discussion would have been reasonable. Instead, the employer reacted personally and dismissively, which the tribunal found was directly linked to the administrator's protected act of raising health and safety concerns. The employer also made the mistake of paying only 80% of wages while the administrator worked full-time during furlough – a clear unauthorised deduction.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that health and safety protections apply strongly during the pandemic. Employees who raise genuine concerns about Covid-19 risks are protected from detriment and dismissal. It also highlights that furlough agreements must reflect actual working arrangements – if an employee works full-time, they must be paid in full. The tribunal's award of over £33,000 reflects the seriousness of the employer's failures.
Similar cases
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.
Swimming teachers dismissed after furlough dispute: a conduct dismissal that went wrong
A tribunal found that Achieve Lifestyle Ltd unfairly dismissed two swimming teachers after a dispute over furlough pay, and failed to make reasonable adjustments for one teacher with breast cancer.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Dismissed by text message after raising concerns about undercooked chicken
A part-time takeaway worker was unfairly dismissed by text message after complaining about undercooked chicken. The tribunal awarded £14,628.50 in compensation.