Residential support worker dismissed for attending work with possible COVID-19 symptoms: dismissal fair
A residential support worker was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after attending work while possibly having COVID-19 symptoms. The tribunal rejected her claims of unfair dismissal, race discrimination and victimisation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Residential Support Worker from 5 December 2018 until her dismissal on 11 May 2021.
- On 16 March 2019, the claimant was told not to speak Arabic on the phone at work, in line with a policy to avoid disturbing service users.
- In May 2019, the claimant was interrupted while praying in a room that a manager needed to use.
- In November 2020, the claimant was told to remove a full-body hazmat suit and use standard PPE, as the suit was deemed inappropriate for the setting.
- The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct after attending work while possibly having COVID-19 symptoms, following a GP's advice to take a test.
- The tribunal found the dismissal fair and within the range of reasonable responses.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started as a Residential Support Worker at Elara House.
-
Phone incident
Fiona Saunders told the claimant not to speak Arabic on the phone in a public area, citing policy.
-
Medication incident
Sadie Novak intervened when the claimant gave epilepsy medication at the wrong time; the claimant felt bullied.
-
Meeting with Ms Glasheen
Claimant complained of bullying; no mention of race discrimination.
-
Prayer incident
Fiona Saunders asked the claimant to leave a room where she was praying, as the room was needed for work.
-
PPE incident
Claimant told to remove a hazmat suit and use standard PPE when assisting a suspected COVID-19 service user.
-
Claimant felt unwell at work
Claimant had a headache but did not believe it was COVID-19; she continued working.
-
GP advised COVID test
Claimant spoke to a GP who advised a COVID test; she took a test that day but continued working.
-
Claimant worked after test
Claimant worked an early shift at Gadebury Heights after receiving an inconclusive test result.
-
Positive COVID test
Claimant tested positive for COVID-19.
-
Disciplinary hearing and dismissal
Claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct for attending work with possible COVID-19 symptoms.
-
Appeal dismissed
Appeal against dismissal was rejected.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for conduct, and whether she was subjected to direct race discrimination or victimisation.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the dismissal for gross misconduct was fair, as the employer had a genuine belief that the claimant attended work while possibly having COVID-19 symptoms, following a reasonable investigation and a fair disciplinary process. The tribunal also rejected the race discrimination and victimisation claims, finding no evidence that the claimant was treated less favourably because of her race or because she had made a protected act.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can fairly dismiss for gross misconduct if there is a genuine belief, based on reasonable grounds, that the employee breached health and safety rules, especially during a pandemic.
- A fair investigation and disciplinary process, including giving the employee a chance to respond, is key to defending an unfair dismissal claim.
- Race discrimination claims require evidence of less favourable treatment because of race; isolated incidents about language or prayer may not be sufficient if there is a legitimate business reason.
- Victimisation claims need a link between a protected act and detrimental treatment; the employer must have knowledge of the protected act and act because of it.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates how employment tribunals approach dismissals linked to COVID-19 health and safety breaches. The claimant, a residential support worker with three years' service, was dismissed after attending work while possibly having symptoms. The employer considered this a serious breach of its health and safety policy, which required staff to self-isolate if they had symptoms or were awaiting a test result. The tribunal accepted that the employer had a genuine belief, based on a reasonable investigation, that the claimant had breached this rule. The disciplinary process was fair, and dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant argued that she had not been told to self-isolate and that her GP had not advised her to stay home. However, the tribunal noted that the employer's policy was clear, and the claimant had attended work after being advised by her GP to take a test, which indicated possible symptoms. The claimant could have avoided dismissal by following the policy and staying home until she received her test result. The tribunal also found that the claimant's complaints about earlier incidents (being told not to speak Arabic, interrupted during prayer, and asked to remove a hazmat suit) did not amount to race discrimination or victimisation, as the employer had legitimate reasons for its actions.
Why this result matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that employers can take a firm stance on health and safety breaches during a pandemic, provided they follow a fair process. Employees should be aware that attending work with possible COVID-19 symptoms can be treated as gross misconduct, even if they do not believe they are infected. The case also shows that race discrimination and victimisation claims require clear evidence of less favourable treatment because of race or a protected act; isolated incidents with plausible business justifications are unlikely to succeed.
Similar cases
Fleet operative dismissed for phone use wins race discrimination claim
A fleet operative who was dismissed for using his mobile phone while driving has won his race discrimination and unfair dismissal claims. The tribunal found the dismissal was tainted by race and reduced compensation by 50% for contributory fault.
Warehouse operative dismissed for racist remark: all claims fail
A former Tesco warehouse operative who was dismissed for making a racist remark and sending threatening messages has lost his claims for unfair dismissal, race discrimination, victimisation, whistleblowing detriment, and holiday pay.
Covid-19 safety concerns: dismissal for refusing to attend work upheld
An installation engineer who refused to attend work over Covid-19 safety fears was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal also rejected his disability discrimination claim as out of time.
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.