Warehouse picker dismissed for lifting trolley in horseplay: dismissal fair despite long service
A warehouse picker with nine years' service was fairly dismissed for lifting an empty trolley to chest height as an act of horseplay. The tribunal upheld the employer's decision, finding it within the band of reasonable responses.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #health-safety
- #gross-misconduct
- #horseplay
- #cctv-evidence
- #band-of-reasonable-responses
- #covid-lockdown-context
Key facts
- The claimant lifted an empty trolley to chest height as an act of horseplay on 2 December 2020.
- The claimant had signed a Safe Systems of Work training declaration for trolley handling.
- The claimant was summarily dismissed on 10 December 2020 for gross misconduct.
- The claimant had nearly 9 years of service with no previous disciplinary action.
- All employees involved in the incident were dismissed.
- The claimant's claim of automatic unfair dismissal due to health and safety concerns was abandoned.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started working as a Distribution Depot Operative.
-
Safe Systems of Work training
Claimant completed training on safe trolley handling and signed a declaration to follow procedures.
-
Terms and conditions signed
Claimant signed updated terms requiring compliance with policies.
-
Incident of horseplay
Claimant lifted an empty trolley to chest height; observed by Tim Walsh who reported it.
-
Fact-finding meeting
Claimant admitted lifting the trolley and apologised.
-
Invitation to disciplinary hearing
Claimant was invited to a hearing for alleged gross misconduct.
-
Disciplinary hearing and dismissal
Luke Eales conducted the hearing; claimant viewed CCTV; dismissed summarily.
-
First appeal hearing
Appeal conducted by Kyle Rutter via telephone; claimant represented by Mr Guggerty.
-
Second appeal hearing
Second appeal chaired by Ian Farmer; dismissal upheld.
-
Second appeal outcome
Appeal dismissed by letter.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal for lifting a trolley as an act of horseplay was fair, considering whether the employer had a genuine belief in misconduct, reasonable grounds, a fair procedure, and whether dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim of unfair dismissal.
The key reason was that the employer had a genuine belief in the claimant's misconduct, based on CCTV evidence and the claimant's own admission. The investigation and disciplinary process were reasonable, and the decision to dismiss fell within the band of reasonable responses for a reasonable employer.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was unsuccessful.
Lessons & takeaways
- Even long-serving employees with clean records can be fairly dismissed for deliberate acts of horseplay that breach safety rules.
- Employers should ensure they have a clear policy on horseplay and that employees are trained on it, as this strengthens the case for dismissal.
- A fair investigation, including viewing CCTV and giving the employee a chance to respond, is crucial to defending a dismissal.
- The band of reasonable responses test gives employers leeway; tribunals will not substitute their own judgment if the decision was within that range.
A moment of horseplay costs a nine-year career
This case shows that even a single act of horseplay can lead to fair dismissal, regardless of an employee's long service and clean record. The claimant, a warehouse picker with nearly nine years of service, lifted an empty trolley to chest height on 2 December 2020. He had signed a Safe Systems of Work declaration just months earlier, acknowledging the correct handling procedures. The employer, Muller UK & Ireland Group, viewed the act as gross misconduct and summarily dismissed him.
What the employer did right
Muller followed a thorough process. After the incident was reported, they held a fact-finding meeting where the claimant admitted the act and apologised. They then conducted a disciplinary hearing, allowing the claimant to view the CCTV footage. The decision to dismiss was taken by Luke Eales, who believed the claimant had breached safety rules. Two separate appeal hearings upheld the decision. The tribunal noted that all employees involved in the incident were dismissed, showing consistency.
Why the result matters
The tribunal applied the well-known 'band of reasonable responses' test. It concluded that a reasonable employer could have dismissed for this misconduct, even though the claimant had long service and no previous warnings. The case highlights that safety rules in a warehouse environment are taken seriously, and deliberate breaches — even if intended as a joke — can justify dismissal. For employees, the lesson is clear: horseplay that risks safety can have severe consequences, regardless of your length of service.
Similar cases
Assistant manager dismissed for using physical force on customers: tribunal upholds John Lewis decision
An assistant team manager with eight years' service was fairly dismissed after CCTV showed him pushing, grabbing and kicking members of the public. The tribunal rejected his claims of disability discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Bus driver dismissed after driving onto pavement to overtake: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 13 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after driving onto a pavement to overtake another bus. The tribunal rejected claims of race and religious discrimination.
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.
Customer service assistant dismissed for attempted strike on teenager: tribunal upholds gross misconduct decision
A customer service assistant who tried to strike a teenage customer with an open hand was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct, the tribunal ruled. His race discrimination claims against third-party security guards were also dismissed.