Kitchen porter dismissed for refusing part-time work during pandemic: dismissal fair

A pandemic dispute over hours

When the restaurant where he worked reopened after the first lockdown, a kitchen porter with nearly three years' service was asked to return on a part-time basis, with the remaining hours topped up by the government's furlough scheme. He wanted his original 40-hour week back, but the business could not offer that due to ongoing restrictions. After two meetings and a warning letter, he was dismissed.

The tribunal accepted that the employer had a substantial reason for dismissal — the employee's refusal to work the hours that were available. The process was fair: the claimant was given opportunities to reconsider and was warned of the consequences. The dismissal was therefore fair.

What the employer could have done differently

The employer's main misstep was in relation to holiday pay. The claimant had not been paid for accrued holiday during the period from April 2020 to January 2021. The tribunal ordered payment of £743.04 for 16 days' leave, though this was reduced by £525 which the employer had already paid as a redundancy payment (which was not actually due). The net award was £218.04.

Other claims — race discrimination and unlawful deduction of wages — were dismissed. The tribunal found no evidence that the dismissal was linked to the claimant's Romanian nationality, and the cash payments made during the part-time period were at the claimant's own request.

Why this matters

This case illustrates that during the pandemic, tribunals were willing to accept 'some other substantial reason' as a fair ground for dismissal when an employee refused a reasonable alternative working pattern. It also shows that even when the main claim fails, employees may still recover unpaid holiday pay — a common issue during furlough. For employers, the lesson is to ensure holiday pay is properly calculated and paid, even during periods of reduced working.