Dismissed after customer complaints were gathered by employer: an unfair process

This case shows how an employer's flawed investigation and predetermined decision-making can make a conduct dismissal unfair, even when the employee had raised protected concerns.

What went wrong

The employer, Charles Watts Engineering Limited, dismissed a Trade Counter Sales Manager after customer complaints about his behaviour. However, the tribunal found that the complaints were not genuinely unprompted but were gathered by the employer. The disciplinary hearing was also flawed: the claimant was not given a proper opportunity to respond, and the managing director had already decided on dismissal before the hearing. The tribunal concluded that the investigation was not reasonable and the decision was outside the range of reasonable responses.

What the employer could have done differently

The employer could have conducted a more thorough and impartial investigation, ensuring that complaints were independently verified. The disciplinary process should have allowed the claimant to fully respond to allegations, and the decision-maker should not have been influenced by senior management's predetermined views. Following the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary procedures would have helped avoid these pitfalls.

Why this matters

This case highlights that even where an employee has raised health and safety concerns, a dismissal can still be unfair if the process is flawed. However, the tribunal rejected claims of automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing, showing that the burden is on the employee to prove that the protected disclosure was the reason for dismissal. For employees, this underscores the importance of ensuring that any protected disclosures are clearly documented and that the employer's actions are scrutinised for procedural fairness. For employers, it is a reminder that a fair process is not just a legal requirement but also a protection against costly unfair dismissal claims.