Dismissed for safety breach after final warning: tribunal upholds Openreach decision

When a final warning leads to dismissal

This case shows how a live final written warning can tip the balance in favour of dismissal for a subsequent misconduct. The claimant, an IT customer service worker with 18 years' service, was dismissed after being observed opening a JF2 box without barriers or a roller bar during a safety check. He admitted he did not follow the safety policy because he believed it did not apply to that task. However, the employer's policies were clear: barriers and correct lifting techniques were required for any handling of footway jointing chamber covers.

The claimant had already received a final written warning in 2020 for a similar safety breach while working on a pole. That warning was still active at the time of the new incident. The tribunal accepted that Openreach genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct, and that this belief was based on reasonable grounds given the clear policy and the claimant's admission.

What the employer did right

Openreach followed a structured disciplinary process: the claimant was suspended, investigated, given a disciplinary pack, invited to a meeting (which he did not attend but provided written representations), and then dismissed. He appealed, though the appeal was heard by a manager at the same level as the dismissing officer. The tribunal found the process was fair overall, noting that the claimant had the opportunity to put his case.

Why the result matters

This case reinforces that employers can dismiss for a single safety breach if the employee is already under a final warning for similar misconduct. It also highlights that employees cannot rely on their own interpretation of safety policies to avoid following them. For anyone considering a claim, the key takeaway is that a live warning for a similar offence makes it much harder to argue that dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses.