Firefighter dismissed for failing to challenge homophobic WhatsApp comments: dismissal fair
A retained crew manager with 12 years' service was fairly dismissed for failing to challenge a homophobic comment in a WhatsApp group and for coordinating grievances to delay a crewing policy. The tribunal rejected his claims of unfair dismissal and part-time worker discrimination.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #whatsapp-messages
- #homophobic-comments
- #social-media-policy
- #managerial-responsibility
- #co-ordinated-grievances
- #toxic-culture
Key facts
- The claimant was a retained crew manager and firefighter with 12 years' service.
- He was a member of a WhatsApp group that evolved from social to work-related use.
- He failed to challenge a homophobic comment made by another member.
- He participated in coordinating grievances to delay implementation of a crewing policy.
- He was dismissed for gross misconduct, later reduced to dismissal with notice on appeal.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was fair and not discriminatory.
Timeline
-
Bullying complaint made
Jake Humphreys brought a bullying and harassment complaint against the claimant and others.
-
Claimant interviewed
The claimant was interviewed by Howard Watts about the complaint and other matters, but not about WhatsApp messages.
-
Claimant suspended
The claimant was suspended pending a disciplinary investigation into his leadership style.
-
Bullying complaint concluded
The bullying complaint was found to have no case to answer, but other concerns were referred for investigation.
-
Disciplinary hearing invited
The claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing on three allegations including failure to challenge offensive comments and coordinating delay of policy.
-
Claimant raised grievance
The claimant raised a formal grievance about the disciplinary process.
-
Disciplinary hearing held
The disciplinary hearing took place; the claimant maintained his defence and gave a qualified apology.
-
Claimant dismissed
The claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant appealed the dismissal decision.
-
Appeal hearing
The appeal hearing was chaired by Rob Barber.
-
Appeal outcome
The dismissal was upheld but changed to dismissal with notice and pay in lieu.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for misconduct was fair under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and whether the claimant, as a part-time worker, was treated less favourably than comparable full-time workers.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims.
- The dismissal was for a potentially fair reason (conduct) and the employer acted reasonably in treating that reason as sufficient for dismissal.
- The investigation was reasonable, the decision was not predetermined, and the sanction (dismissal with notice on appeal) was within the band of reasonable responses.
- The part-time worker claim failed because the comparators were not in materially similar circumstances, and there was no less favourable treatment on grounds of part-time status.
Lessons & takeaways
- Managers and senior staff are expected to challenge offensive comments, even in informal settings like WhatsApp groups, and failing to do so can amount to gross misconduct.
- Coordinating grievances with colleagues to delay policy implementation can be seen as a serious breach of trust and confidence, justifying dismissal.
- Long service does not automatically protect against dismissal if the misconduct is serious enough.
- Part-time worker discrimination claims require a direct comparison with a full-time worker in the same role and circumstances; differences in role or conduct can defeat the claim.
A manager's duty to challenge
This case highlights the responsibilities that come with a management role, even outside formal work settings. The claimant, a retained crew manager with 12 years' service, was a member of a WhatsApp group that had evolved from social to work-related use. When a homophobic comment was posted, he did not challenge it. The tribunal accepted that this failure, combined with his role in coordinating grievances to delay a crewing policy, amounted to gross misconduct.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer's investigation was thorough, and the disciplinary process gave the claimant ample opportunity to respond. The dismissing officer considered the claimant's long service and mitigation, but concluded that the misconduct was serious enough to warrant dismissal. On appeal, the sanction was reduced to dismissal with notice, reflecting some recognition of his service. The tribunal found no procedural unfairness or predetermination.
Why this matters for similar claims
For employees in managerial or supervisory positions, this case is a reminder that the duty to uphold workplace standards extends to informal communications. Failing to challenge discriminatory comments can be as serious as making them. For employers, it shows that a well-documented investigation and a reasoned decision-making process can defend a dismissal even where the employee has long service. The part-time worker claim also failed because the comparators were not in materially similar circumstances, reinforcing that such claims require a like-for-like comparison.
Similar cases
Sterile specialist dismissed after posting selfies in sterile area: discrimination claims struck out
A tribunal struck out a sterile specialist's race and age discrimination claims after she admitted posting selfies showing confidential information on social media. The claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
Dismissed for a racist tweet: employer failed to investigate mental health impact
A supervisor with depression was unfairly dismissed after posting an offensive tweet while on furlough. The tribunal found Stagecoach failed to consider his mental health before deciding to dismiss.
Civil servant who resigned after Facebook investigation loses constructive dismissal claim
A Disability Employment Advisor Leader with 18 years' service resigned after being referred for gross misconduct over Facebook posts. The tribunal found the Department for Work and Pensions acted reasonably.
Offensive WhatsApp messages led to fair dismissal but procedural flaws meant no compensation
Two long-serving managers were unfairly dismissed for offensive WhatsApp messages, but a tribunal awarded no compensation because they would have been sacked anyway and their conduct contributed fully.