Support worker dismissed over raised voice: unfair dismissal due to flawed investigation
A support worker who raised her voice at a vulnerable adult was unfairly dismissed after her employer relied on undisclosed witness statements. The tribunal awarded £12,108, reduced by a third for her own conduct.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #support-worker
- #vulnerable-adult
- #raised-voice
- #undisclosed-witness-statements
- #inadequate-investigation
- #contributory-conduct
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Support Worker from 5 January 2019 until her summary dismissal on 5 July 2022.
- On 29 April 2022, the claimant had a disagreement with a service user (CG) about food choices, during which the claimant raised her voice.
- The respondent's investigation did not take statements from all witnesses, including the other support worker (AV) who was present.
- The dismissing officer, Mr Tomlinson, relied on undisclosed and unchallenged statements from colleagues that were critical of the claimant.
- The appeal officer, Mr Price, also relied on those undisclosed statements in upholding the dismissal.
- The tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair because the employer did not act reasonably in its investigation and decision-making process.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Ms Evans commenced employment as a Support Worker with Just One Health & Social Care Ltd.
-
Incident with service user
The claimant had a disagreement with service user CG about food choices; the claimant raised her voice. The incident was witnessed by supervisors Lynn Dutton and Rhian Dyer.
-
Claimant suspended
The claimant was suspended pending investigation into allegations of verbally abusing a service user.
-
First investigatory meeting
The claimant attended the first investigatory meeting conducted by Shaun Randall.
-
Second investigatory meeting
The claimant attended a second investigatory meeting.
-
Disciplinary hearing
A disciplinary hearing was held, conducted by HR manager Hayley Johnson. The claimant was represented by her trade union.
-
Claimant dismissed
The claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct. The decision was made by director Paul Tomlinson, who signed off a draft letter prepared by Ms Johnson.
-
Appeal hearing
The claimant's appeal was heard by director Greg Price, who upheld the dismissal.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
The claimant presented her claim for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination (later withdrawn).
-
Liability hearing
The liability hearing took place at Wrexham Employment Tribunal before Employment Judge T. Vincent Ryan.
-
Liability judgment
The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed.
-
Remedy hearing
The remedy hearing was held; the tribunal awarded £12,108.02, reduced by one-third for contributory conduct.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer had a reasonable belief in the claimant's misconduct, carried out a reasonable investigation, and whether dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses for a conduct dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the claimant was unfairly dismissed. The employer's investigation was inadequate: it did not take statements from all witnesses, including a colleague who was present, and the dismissing officer relied on undisclosed witness statements that the claimant could not challenge. The appeal officer repeated the same error.
The compensation was reduced by 33% for contributory conduct because the claimant had raised her voice at a service user.
- Basic award: Not specified separately
- Compensatory award: Not specified separately
- Total award: £12,108.02 (after 33% reduction for contributory fault)
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must conduct a thorough investigation, including taking statements from all available witnesses, before dismissing for misconduct.
- Withholding witness statements from the employee during the disciplinary process makes the dismissal procedurally unfair.
- Even where an employee admits some misconduct (like raising their voice), the employer must still follow a fair process or risk an unfair dismissal finding.
- Appeal officers should independently review the case and not rely on the same flawed evidence that tainted the original decision.
This case shows how a seemingly straightforward conduct dismissal can unravel when the employer cuts corners in its investigation. The support worker had been employed for three and a half years when she raised her voice at a service user during a disagreement about food. She was suspended, investigated, and ultimately dismissed for gross misconduct. But the tribunal found that the process was so flawed that the dismissal was unfair.
What went wrong
The employer failed to interview a key witness — another support worker who was present during the incident. Instead, the dismissing officer relied on written statements from colleagues that were never shown to the claimant. She had no chance to challenge them. The appeal officer made the same mistake, relying on those same undisclosed statements. The tribunal said this put the dismissal outside the range of reasonable responses.
What could have been done differently
A fair process would have included interviewing all witnesses, disclosing any statements to the employee, and allowing her to respond. Even if the employer still believed dismissal was appropriate, following proper procedure would have made a successful claim far less likely. The tribunal also noted that the employer had a professional HR function and access to external legal advice — so the failings were not down to inexperience.
Why this matters
For employees in similar roles, this case is a reminder that even if you admit some fault (like raising your voice), the employer must still follow a fair process. For employers, it underscores that a flawed investigation can turn an otherwise justified dismissal into an unfair one, leading to compensation awards — here over £12,000 — even after a reduction for the employee's own conduct.
Similar cases
Unfair dismissal over a discriminatory comment: when the investigation falls short
A mobile technician with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed after describing a colleague as a 'female Eastern European woman' who 'always makes mistakes'. The tribunal found the employer's investigation was inadequate.
Team leader dismissed for defeating safety system wins unfair dismissal claim
A team leader with 6 years' service was unfairly dismissed after a flawed investigation into a safety breach. The tribunal found the employer's process was inadequate and reduced compensation by 20% for the chance she would have been dismissed anyway.
Night manager with 17 years' service unfairly dismissed for WhatsApp comments after raising pay concerns
A night manager who raised concerns about pay and holiday pay was unfairly dismissed after posting derogatory comments in a WhatsApp group. The tribunal found the real reason was her assertion of statutory rights.
Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.