Second full-time job leads to dismissal: claims struck out as out of time
A former London Underground employee who was dismissed for having a second full-time job without consent had all his claims struck out. The tribunal found his unfair dismissal claim could not proceed due to lack of service, and his discrimination claim was brought too late.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 14 October 2019 to 26 July 2021.
- He was dismissed for gross misconduct for having a second full-time job without consent.
- The claimant did not have two years' continuous service, so the unfair dismissal claim was struck out.
- The disability discrimination claim was brought out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time.
- The claims for unlawful deduction from wages and holiday pay were also out of time.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working for London Underground Limited.
-
Pandemic shielding began
The claimant was required to shield and remained off work for lengthy periods.
-
Return to work
The claimant returned to work after shielding.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct for having a second full-time job without consent.
-
Notice of appeal
The claimant prepared his notice of appeal against dismissal.
-
Final payslip received
The claimant received a payslip showing recoupment and holiday pay, net payment of £262.97.
-
Appeal hearing
The claimant attended the appeal hearing with his trade union representative.
-
First ACAS contact
The claimant contacted ACAS for early conciliation.
-
First claim lodged
The claimant lodged claim 2305426/21 for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
-
Second ACAS contact
The claimant contacted ACAS again for a second early conciliation certificate.
-
Second claim lodged
The claimant lodged claim 2305989/21 for unfair dismissal, notice pay, and holiday pay.
-
Preliminary hearing
The tribunal struck out all claims as out of time or lacking service.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee's claims were brought within the applicable time limits and, if not, whether time should be extended for the discrimination claim on just and equitable grounds.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out all claims.
- The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because the employee did not have two years' continuous service, a legal requirement for bringing such a claim.
- The disability discrimination claim was out of time: the last act of alleged discrimination was the dismissal on 26 July 2021, but the employee did not contact ACAS until 6 November 2021, over three months later. The tribunal decided it was not just and equitable to extend time, noting that despite his health issues, the employee was able to manage his appeal and was aware of employment tribunals.
- The claims for unlawful deduction from wages and holiday pay were also out of time, and it was reasonably practicable for the employee to have brought them within the three-month limit.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employees with less than two years' service cannot bring unfair dismissal claims, regardless of the circumstances of their dismissal.
- Time limits for discrimination claims are strict: you have three months minus one day from the last act of discrimination to contact ACAS.
- Waiting for the outcome of an internal appeal before starting a tribunal claim can be risky, as it may cause you to miss the deadline.
- Health problems alone may not be enough to persuade a tribunal to extend time if you were able to manage other tasks during the same period.
- If you have a potential claim, seek legal advice early and do not delay contacting ACAS.
A case of timing and service
This case shows how two fundamental legal hurdles — time limits and length of service — can block a claim before the tribunal ever considers the merits. The former employee, who worked for London Underground Limited from October 2019 to July 2021, was dismissed for gross misconduct after the company discovered he held a second full-time job without permission. He argued that his dismissal was actually due to disability discrimination linked to his need to shield during the pandemic. But the tribunal never reached that argument.
Why the claims failed
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out immediately because the employee had not completed two years' continuous service. That is a strict legal requirement for most unfair dismissal claims, and there is no discretion for tribunals to waive it. The discrimination claim faced a different problem: it was brought about two weeks late. The employee had until 25 October 2021 to contact ACAS, but he did not do so until 6 November. He argued that his poor health — including diabetes, asthma, pancreatitis and severe depression — should justify extending time. However, the tribunal noted that he had been able to prepare his appeal letter in August, attend an appeal hearing in October, and was aware of employment tribunals. The decision to wait for the appeal outcome before bringing a claim was a choice, not a necessity, and the tribunal declined to extend time.
What this means for similar claims
This case is a reminder that procedural rules are often as important as the facts of the dispute. Employees considering a tribunal claim should act quickly and not assume that an internal process will pause the clock. For discrimination claims, the three-month time limit runs from the last act of discrimination, not from the end of any appeal. And for unfair dismissal, the two-year service requirement means many employees have no protection at all, no matter how unfair their dismissal may seem.
Similar cases
Senior nurse's unfair dismissal claim struck out after being filed over four years late
A tribunal struck out a senior nurse's unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims because she filed them more than four years after the deadline, despite knowing the time limits.
Assistant headteacher dismissed for sending sexual message to child under duress from coercive partner
An assistant headteacher with 12 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after sending a sexual message to a child under duress from a coercive partner. The tribunal rejected her claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
19-year employee's claims dismissed as out of time despite disabilities
A bureau operator with 19 years' service had his claims for breach of contract and discrimination thrown out because they were lodged over four years after his dismissal.
Disability discrimination claims dismissed as out of time: a reminder on tribunal deadlines
A former optician employee's disability discrimination claims were dismissed because they were filed too late. The tribunal refused to extend the time limit, finding it was not just and equitable to do so.