Refusal to travel to Iraq during Covid-19: dismissal for gross misconduct was fair

This case shows how a refusal to travel, even during the Covid-19 pandemic, can lead to a fair dismissal if the employer follows proper procedure and travel is a core part of the job.

The claimant was a Regional Desk Manager for Ummah Welfare Trust, a charity that required him to travel overseas. In September 2020, he refused to go to Iraq to supervise a cash distribution, saying he needed unequivocal assurances about support if he caught Covid-19. The employer had already provided FCDO advice and a risk assessment, but the claimant was not satisfied.

What the employer did right

The charity launched a disciplinary process, held two hearings, and gave the claimant a chance to appeal. The dismissing officer found that the refusal was gross insubordination and that the claimant had failed to complete a risk assessment. The tribunal noted that the employer genuinely believed in the misconduct, had reasonable grounds, and followed a fair procedure. The dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses.

What the claimant could have done differently

The claimant might have had a stronger case if he had relied on the statutory right to refuse work in dangerous circumstances under section 100 of the Employment Rights Act. However, he did not bring that claim. Instead, he argued ordinary unfair dismissal, which requires the employer to act reasonably. The tribunal found that the employer did act reasonably.

Why this matters

For employees whose roles require travel, a refusal to go can be risky unless there is a clear legal basis for the refusal. For employers, this case is a reminder that a thorough investigation and fair process can defend a dismissal even when the employee has genuine health concerns. The outcome turned on the specific facts: the employer's risk assessment, the employee's failure to complete it, and the essential nature of travel for the role.