UNISON organiser dismissed over COVID arrest: conduct dismissal upheld
A regional organiser who was arrested in Tenerife for breaching Spain's COVID lockdown and then gave media interviews against instructions was fairly dismissed by UNISON, the tribunal has ruled.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Regional Organiser from 1 January 2015 until her dismissal on 24 June 2020.
- On 16 March 2020, while on holiday in Tenerife, the claimant was arrested for disobeying police orders enforcing Spain's COVID-19 lockdown.
- The incident was filmed and shared on social media over 4 million times.
- The claimant did not disclose the incident to her employer until confronted by her manager on 23 March 2020.
- Despite being instructed not to speak to the media, the claimant gave interviews to several newspapers on 24 March 2020.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct, finding that her actions brought the organisation into disrepute.
Timeline
-
Employment start
The claimant began working for UNISON as a Regional Organiser in the Eastern Region.
-
Arrest in Tenerife
The claimant was arrested for disobeying police orders while using a hotel swimming pool closed due to COVID-19 restrictions. She was detained overnight and released without charge the next day.
-
Return to work and media contact
The claimant returned to work. She spoke to her manager but did not disclose the incident. Later, a journalist from Mail Online doorstepped her. The respondent learned of the incident and issued a press statement.
-
Further media interviews
Despite being told not to speak to the media, the claimant gave interviews to the Sun, Eastern Daily Press, and other outlets. She was suspended pending investigation.
-
Investigation report
Investigating officer Ms Sasha Savage produced a report recommending that there was a case to answer on all four allegations.
-
Disciplinary hearing
A disciplinary hearing was held via video, chaired by Ms Maggie Ferncombe. All four allegations were found proven, amounting to gross misconduct.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed with three months' pay in lieu of notice.
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant appealed her dismissal, raising seven grounds of appeal.
-
Appeal hearing
An appeal panel chaired by Mrs Maureen Le Marinel heard the appeal and upheld the dismissal.
-
Claim presented
The claimant presented her claim to the employment tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal was unfair and whether the claimant was discriminated against because of her political belief in left-wing politics and socialism.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It held that UNISON had a genuine belief in the claimant's gross misconduct based on a reasonable investigation, and that dismissal was a proportionate response. The discrimination claim failed because the claimant did not prove that her political belief motivated any of the decisions. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Social media and press coverage can make a conduct issue a reputational risk, justifying dismissal even for a first offence.
- Following your employer's instructions not to speak to the media is critical — ignoring them can be seen as a breach of trust.
- A belief in left-wing politics can be a protected philosophical belief, but you must show it actually motivated the employer's actions to win a discrimination claim.
- Employers should ensure their investigation and disciplinary process is thorough and reasonable — the tribunal will defer to that if it is within the range of reasonable responses.
What this case shows in practice
A regional organiser with five years' service at UNISON was dismissed after being arrested in Tenerife for using a hotel swimming pool closed under Spain's COVID-19 lockdown. The incident was filmed and shared millions of times. Although she was released without charge, the publicity caused significant reputational concern for the union.
When she returned to work, she did not disclose the arrest. Her manager found out via the media. Despite being told not to speak to journalists, she gave interviews to several newspapers the next day. UNISON suspended her, investigated, and dismissed her for gross misconduct.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant argued that her dismissal was unfair and that she was discriminated against because of her political beliefs. However, the tribunal found that UNISON acted reasonably. The key failing was the claimant's decision to ignore clear instructions not to engage with the media. If she had disclosed the incident immediately and declined interviews, the outcome might have been different.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case confirms that employers can treat serious reputational damage as gross misconduct, even if the underlying behaviour was not criminal. It also shows that a protected belief (such as socialism) does not automatically make a dismissal discriminatory — the employee must prove that the belief was a material factor in the employer's decision. Here, the tribunal accepted that UNISON's concern was purely about conduct and reputation.
Similar cases
Stranded in Gambia during COVID: dismissal for unauthorised absence was fair
A facilities service support assistant with 41 years' service was fairly dismissed after failing to return from the Gambia when flights were available, the tribunal ruled.
Dismissed over a private Facebook post: when does social media cross the line?
A care worker was sacked for gross misconduct after a Facebook comment about a colleague. The tribunal found the dismissal unfair — but reduced compensation by 25% for contributory conduct.
Packing operator dismissed for leaving early without permission: dismissal fair despite inconsistent colleague treatment
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a packing operator with 11 years' service who left work early without authorisation and was found to have been dishonest about his start time. No compensation was awarded.
Bus driver dismissed for refusing alcohol test after collision: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after refusing a breath alcohol test following an at-fault collision. The tribunal also dismissed his discrimination and victimisation claims.