Partial win £196 awarded Employment Tribunal · 26 July 2022

Dismissed for unauthorised absence while caring for mother: conduct dismissal upheld

A security officer who stopped attending work to care for his vulnerable mother was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct. The tribunal found the employer acted reasonably in dismissing for unauthorised absence, but awarded £195.72 for unpaid holiday pay.

1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026

Case details

Key facts

  • The claimant was employed from 21 June 2013 to 11 March 2021 as a Customer Service Security Officer.
  • He was absent from work without authorization from 27 January to 4 March 2021.
  • The claimant did not contact his line manager during his absence and did not seek permission.
  • He claimed he was caring for his vulnerable mother but did not notify his employer as required.
  • The respondent dismissed him for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing he did not attend.
  • The claimant did not appeal the dismissal.

Timeline

  1. Employment started

    Claimant began working for Wilson James Limited as a Customer Service Security Officer.

  2. Absence began

    Claimant stopped attending work without authorization, initially citing self-isolation due to COVID-19.

  3. Investigation letter sent

    Respondent sent a letter to claimant regarding allegations of breach of GDPR and absence without authority.

  4. Claimant's email response

    Claimant emailed his responses to allegations, stating he was caring for vulnerable family members.

  5. Investigation meeting missed

    Claimant failed to attend the scheduled investigation meeting; it was rescheduled for 8 February.

  6. Second investigation meeting missed

    Claimant again failed to attend the rescheduled investigation meeting.

  7. Disciplinary hearing invitation

    Claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing on 25 February, which he requested to reschedule to 4 March.

  8. Disciplinary hearing held in absence

    Claimant did not attend the disciplinary hearing; it proceeded in his absence.

  9. Dismissal

    Claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct due to unauthorized absence.

  10. ET1 presented

    Claimant presented his claim to the Employment Tribunal.

The outcome

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding that Wilson James Limited acted reasonably in treating the unauthorised absence as gross misconduct. The claimant had failed to attend work for over five weeks without notifying his manager or seeking permission, despite being asked to attend meetings. The tribunal noted that the claimant did not appeal the dismissal and that the employer had followed a reasonable procedure.

However, the tribunal upheld a claim for unpaid holiday pay, awarding:

  • Holiday pay: £195.72

Lessons & takeaways

  • Employees must follow their employer's absence reporting procedures, even if they believe they have a right to time off for dependants.
  • Failing to attend investigation or disciplinary meetings without good reason can weaken your case and lead to dismissal in your absence.
  • Employers should ensure they pay all accrued holiday pay on termination, as this is a separate contractual entitlement.
  • Not appealing a dismissal can make it harder to argue that the procedure was unfair.

When caring responsibilities clash with work obligations

This case highlights the importance of following proper absence reporting procedures, even when dealing with pressing family responsibilities. The claimant, a Customer Service Security Officer with over seven years' service, stopped attending work in January 2021, initially citing COVID-19 self-isolation. He later said he was caring for his vulnerable mother, who was on the 'exceptionally vulnerable' list. However, he did not notify his line manager or seek permission for the absence, and he failed to attend investigation and disciplinary meetings.

What the employer did right

Wilson James Limited sent letters inviting the claimant to meetings, rescheduled when he asked, and ultimately held the disciplinary hearing in his absence. The tribunal found this was a reasonable investigation and that the employer genuinely believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct. The claimant's failure to appeal also counted against him.

Why the result matters

While the tribunal sympathised with the claimant's caring role, it emphasised that employees must follow their employer's procedures. The award of £195.72 for unpaid holiday pay shows that even where a dismissal is fair, employers must still meet their contractual obligations. For anyone in a similar situation, the key takeaway is to communicate with your employer and follow the correct process, even if you believe you have a statutory right to time off.

Similar cases