Deputy store manager dismissed after inappropriate conversation with 15-year-old customer: tribunal upholds decision
An Asda deputy store manager with 10 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after asking a 15-year-old customer for her phone number, the Watford Employment Tribunal has ruled.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #inappropriate-conversation-with-minor
- #gross-misconduct
- #race-discrimination
- #covid-19-shielding
- #comparator-evidence
Key facts
- The claimant, a Deputy Store Manager, engaged in an inappropriate conversation with a 15-year-old customer on 17 July 2020.
- The claimant admitted asking for the girl's phone number, suggesting she hide his number under a female name, and saying he wished she was 18.
- The respondent investigated and dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing.
- The claimant's race discrimination claims were based on alleged failure to allow him to shield during COVID-19 and alleged disparate treatment in disciplinary outcomes.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and not racially motivated.
- The claimant did not establish less favourable treatment on grounds of race; comparators were not in materially similar circumstances.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as Night Trading Manager at Park Royal store.
-
Promotion to Deputy Store Manager
Claimant appointed Deputy Store Manager at Southgate superstore.
-
Incident with minor
Claimant engaged in inappropriate conversation with 15-year-old customer AM outside the store, asking for her phone number and suggesting hiding his number.
-
Complaint reported
AM reported the incident to store staff, showing video recordings.
-
Claimant suspended
Claimant suspended on full pay pending investigation.
-
Investigation meeting
Mr Achilleos held investigation meeting; claimant admitted conversation but argued it was not work-related.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Six-hour disciplinary hearing chaired by Mr Good; claimant gave his account.
-
Dismissal
Claimant summarily dismissed for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal letter (alleged)
Claimant claims he sent appeal letter to respondent's Leeds office; tribunal found letter not sent.
-
Claim presented
Claim form presented to tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal was fair given that the misconduct occurred outside work and off-duty, and whether the claimant was subjected to direct race discrimination regarding COVID-19 shielding and disciplinary treatment.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both the unfair dismissal and direct race discrimination claims.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant admitted the conversation, which involved asking for a 15-year-old's phone number and suggesting she hide his number under a female name.
- Asda's investigation and disciplinary process were reasonable; the decision to dismiss for gross misconduct was within the band of reasonable responses.
- The race discrimination claims failed because the claimant did not provide a proper comparator, and the treatment he received was not on racial grounds.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Conduct outside work can still be grounds for dismissal if it impacts the employer's reputation or interests.
- Admissions of misconduct can significantly weaken a claim of unfair dismissal, even if the employee disputes the seriousness.
- Race discrimination claims require a proper comparator in materially similar circumstances; general allegations are insufficient.
- A fair investigation and disciplinary process, including giving the employee a chance to respond, is key to defending a dismissal.
- Employees should be aware that off-duty behaviour involving minors may be treated as gross misconduct by employers.
When off-duty conduct leads to dismissal
This case shows that an employee's actions outside of work can still lead to a fair dismissal if they affect the employer's business. The deputy store manager, who had worked for Asda for 10 years, engaged in a conversation with a 15-year-old girl outside the store while off-duty and not wearing uniform. He asked for her phone number and suggested she hide his number under a female name, saying he wished she was 18. The girl recorded the conversation and reported it to the store.
Asda suspended the claimant, investigated, and held a six-hour disciplinary hearing. The claimant admitted the conversation but argued it was not work-related and that the dismissal was unfair. The tribunal disagreed, finding that Asda had a genuine belief in his misconduct, based on reasonable grounds and a reasonable investigation. The decision to dismiss for gross misconduct was within the range of reasonable responses, even for a first offence.
What the employer did right
Asda followed a thorough process: suspension, investigation, a detailed disciplinary hearing, and the opportunity for the claimant to present his case. The tribunal noted that the claimant admitted the key facts, which made the employer's belief reasonable. The company also had a clear policy that off-duty conduct bringing the business into disrepute could be gross misconduct.
Why the race discrimination claim failed
The claimant also alleged direct race discrimination, claiming he was not allowed to shield during COVID-19 and that his treatment was harsher than white employees. However, the tribunal found he did not provide a proper comparator – someone in materially similar circumstances who was treated differently. Without that, the claim could not succeed.
What this means for similar cases
For employees, this case is a reminder that off-duty behaviour can have serious consequences, especially when it involves minors. For employers, it confirms that a fair process and reasonable belief in misconduct can justify dismissal, even for a long-serving employee. The key is to investigate thoroughly, give the employee a chance to respond, and apply policies consistently.
Similar cases
Senior lecturer dismissed for romantic relationship with student: dismissal fair
A senior lecturer with 14 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after developing a romantic relationship with a student. The tribunal rejected his claims of unfair dismissal and race discrimination.
Bus driver dismissed for refusing alcohol test after collision: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after refusing a breath alcohol test following an at-fault collision. The tribunal also dismissed his discrimination and victimisation claims.
Delivery manager dismissed for 'intention to steal' wins race discrimination claim
A black Caribbean delivery manager was unfairly dismissed and racially stereotyped after a returned iPhone went missing. The tribunal found Royal Mail's investigation was flawed and the claimant was treated less favourably than a hypothetical white comparator.
Healthcare consultant dismissed for gross misconduct after customer complaints: race discrimination claims rejected
A healthcare consultant with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct following four customer complaints about his attitude. The tribunal also rejected his claims of race discrimination and victimisation.