Prison officer dismissed after two security breaches: unfair dismissal claim fails but reasonable adjustments claim succeeds
A prison officer with two years' service was dismissed for gross misconduct after signing off a Category A prisoner's cell without checking it. The tribunal upheld the dismissal as fair but found the prison failed to make reasonable adjustments by not providing a mentor.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #prison-officer
- #security-breach
- #disability-discrimination
- #reasonable-adjustments
- #mentor
- #anxiety-and-depression
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a prison officer at HMP Wakefield from 13 November 2017 to 3 November 2020.
- She received a first written warning on 5 September 2019 for leaving healthcare centre gates unsecured.
- On 21 January 2020, she signed the roll check without verifying a Category A prisoner was locked in his cell.
- She was dismissed for gross misconduct on 14 September 2020, upheld on appeal on 3 November 2020.
- The respondent conceded the claimant was disabled due to anxiety and depression.
- The respondent failed to provide a mentor as agreed in September 2019 and January 2020.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced work as a prison officer at HMP Wakefield.
-
Partner's suicide
Claimant's partner took his own life, leading to her absence and mental health issues.
-
First security breach
Claimant left healthcare centre gates unsecured and unsupervised.
-
First disciplinary hearing
Claimant accepted charges; received a six-month written warning.
-
Mentor agreed but not provided
Governor Mahoney agreed to provide a mentor; claimant moved to segregation unit as support.
-
Claimant raised lack of mentor
Claimant told Mahoney she still had no mentor; Mahoney reiterated need for mentorship.
-
Second security breach
Claimant signed roll without checking cell C2-03; Category A prisoner unaccounted for.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Claimant accepted allegations; dismissed for gross misconduct.
-
Appeal dismissed
Appeal against dismissal rejected; effective date of termination.
-
Claim presented
Claim form presented to Employment Tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the prison officer's dismissal for gross misconduct was unfair, whether her dismissal was unfavourable treatment arising from her disability, and whether the prison failed to make reasonable adjustments by not providing a mentor.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim of unfair dismissal, finding that the prison acted reasonably in treating the two security breaches as gross misconduct. The claim of unfavourable treatment for something arising from disability also failed because the prison did not know the misconduct was linked to her disability. However, the claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments succeeded in part: the prison had agreed to provide a mentor but never did, and this was a reasonable adjustment that should have been made. No compensation was awarded because the claim was brought outside the time limit, though the tribunal extended time to hear it.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must follow through on agreed reasonable adjustments, such as providing a mentor, even if the employee's performance issues are conduct-related.
- A short service length (here two years) can make it harder to argue that a dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses, as the employer may have less obligation to explore alternatives.
- Disability discrimination claims based on conduct may fail if the employer did not know the misconduct was linked to the disability at the time of dismissal.
- Time limits for bringing reasonable adjustment claims are strict – even if the claim succeeds, compensation may be limited if the claim is late.
This case shows how a prison officer's struggle with anxiety and depression, following her partner's suicide, intersected with her conduct at work. After a first warning for leaving gates unsecured, the prison agreed to provide a mentor to support her. But the mentor never materialised, and a second, more serious security breach followed: she signed off a Category A prisoner's cell without checking it. The prison dismissed her for gross misconduct.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal accepted that the prison had reasonable grounds to dismiss – two security breaches in a high-security environment are serious. The dismissal was fair because the prison acted within the range of reasonable responses for an employee with only two years' service. However, the tribunal found that the prison had breached its duty to make reasonable adjustments by failing to provide a mentor. This was a straightforward failure: the prison agreed to it, knew it was needed, and simply did not do it.
Why the result matters
The case is a reminder that reasonable adjustments are not optional. Even where an employee's conduct leads to a fair dismissal, a failure to implement agreed adjustments can still be a breach of the Equality Act. Here, the claim succeeded but no compensation was awarded because it was brought outside the time limit. For employees, this underlines the importance of bringing claims promptly. For employers, it shows that promising a reasonable adjustment and then not delivering it is a clear legal risk, even if the employee is later dismissed for unrelated conduct.
Similar cases
Disability discrimination claim saved from strike out despite repeated delays
An employment tribunal refused to strike out a former employee's disability discrimination claim despite years of missed deadlines, but imposed strict conditions to get the case to trial.
Bus driver with Crohn's disease awarded £25,000 after employer failed to provide suitable shifts
A bus driver with over 30 years' service was awarded £25,000 after his employer repeatedly allocated shifts that did not meet his disability-related needs, causing him to soil himself at work.
Administrative Officer's constructive dismissal claim over trigger words and phone policy rejected
An Administrative Officer who resigned after just seven weeks with the Ministry of Justice lost her claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal found her employer had acted reasonably throughout.
Office manager with visual impairment wins £44,489 after employer failed to implement Access to Work recommendations
An office manager with retinal dystrophy was awarded £44,489 after her employer failed to implement recommended equipment and training from Access to Work. The tribunal found the delay was a failure to make reasonable adjustments.