Reinstatement ordered but ignored: railway employee awarded over £78,000
A tribunal ordered a railway company to reinstate a 20-year employee after unfair dismissal. When the company failed to comply, it was ordered to pay over £78,000 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #reinstatement
- #additional-award
- #contributory-conduct
- #long-service
- #pension-loss
Key facts
- The claimant was dismissed on 19 July 2022 after 20 years of continuous employment.
- The tribunal ordered reinstatement, but the respondent failed to comply.
- The claimant's gross salary and benefits at dismissal were £40,364 per annum.
- The basic award was calculated at £15,417 after a 10% reduction for contributory fault.
- The compensatory award was capped at 52 weeks' gross pay: £38,432.36.
- An additional award of 44 weeks' pay (£25,124) was made for non-compliance with the reinstatement order.
Timeline
-
Claimant's date of birth
The claimant was born on 1 December 1958.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed from her employment with London North Eastern Railway Limited.
-
Remedy hearing (first)
The tribunal held a remedy hearing and ordered reinstatement with back pay of £50,894.64.
-
Judgment sent
The remedy judgment was sent to the parties.
-
Reinstatement deadline
The respondent was ordered to reinstate the claimant by this date, but failed to do so.
-
Remedy hearing (second)
The tribunal held a further remedy hearing to address the respondent's failure to reinstate and awarded additional sums.
-
Revised judgment sent
The revised remedy judgment was sent to the parties.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide the appropriate remedy for unfair dismissal, including whether to order reinstatement and how much compensation to award when the employer refused to comply with the reinstatement order.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed and ordered reinstatement with back pay of £50,894.64. When the respondent failed to reinstate by the deadline, the tribunal awarded further compensation.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £15,417 (reduced by 10% for contributory fault)
- Compensatory award: £38,432.36 (capped at 52 weeks' gross pay)
- Additional award for non-compliance: £25,124 (44 weeks' pay)
- Total: £78,943.36
Lessons & takeaways
- If a tribunal orders reinstatement and the employer refuses, you may be entitled to an additional award of up to 52 weeks' pay.
- Long-serving employees (20+ years) are entitled to a higher basic award, but this can be reduced if you contributed to your dismissal.
- Keep records of all benefits and pension contributions – these can form part of your compensation claim.
- An employer's failure to comply with a reinstatement order can result in significant extra costs.
A reinstatement order that was ignored
A railway employee with 20 years' service was unfairly dismissed by London North Eastern Railway Limited. The tribunal ordered the company to reinstate her with full back pay, including salary, benefits, and pension contributions. But the employer refused to comply, leaving the tribunal to impose additional penalties.
What the employer could have done differently
The respondent could have avoided the additional award by simply following the reinstatement order. Instead, by failing to reinstate by the deadline, it incurred an extra £25,124 in compensation – on top of the back pay and standard awards. Employers who contest reinstatement orders should be aware that tribunals have power to penalise non-compliance heavily.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case shows that reinstatement is a real remedy, not just a theoretical one. When an employer ignores it, the tribunal can award an 'additional award' of up to 52 weeks' pay. For employees, it highlights the importance of pursuing reinstatement if you want your job back – and the financial consequences for employers who refuse. The 10% reduction for contributory fault also serves as a reminder that your own conduct can affect the final payout.
Similar cases
Warehouse operative unfairly dismissed after mitigation ignored in conduct case
An employment tribunal found ASDA unfairly dismissed a warehouse operative with 18 years' service after failing to investigate his mitigation evidence, awarding £14,817 in compensation.
Mailman with 32 years' service unfairly dismissed over duplicate barcode incident
A mailman with 32 years of unblemished service was unfairly dismissed by Royal Mail after a customer complaint about a duplicate barcode. The tribunal found the investigation and disciplinary process flawed, and reduced compensation by 20% for his own conduct.
Security officer with 17 years' service dismissed for refusing hand sanitiser checks: unfair but heavily reduced award
A security officer who refused to carry out hand sanitiser checks was unfairly dismissed due to a flawed investigation, but his 75% contribution and a 90% Polkey reduction meant he received only £5,281.
Security officer dismissed by email without hearing: unfair but 100% contributory conduct
A tribunal found that a security officer with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after being sacked by email without any disciplinary hearing, but reduced her compensation to zero because her own conduct contributed entirely to the dismissal.