Long-serving union branch secretary dismissed for bullying: conduct dismissal upheld
A UNISON branch secretary with 49 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after two complaints of bullying and threatening behaviour. The tribunal rejected his claim that he was targeted for trade union activities.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #trade-union-activities
- #bullying
- #gross-misconduct
- #disciplinary-process
- #suspension
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent from 1973 and worked as full-time UNISON branch secretary from 1998.
- Two complaints of bullying were made against the claimant by fellow union officers in November and December 2019.
- The respondent suspended the claimant on 29 November 2019 and appointed an external investigator.
- The disciplinary hearing lasted 12 days and the dismissing officer found two allegations of gross misconduct proven.
- The claimant was summarily dismissed on 2 February 2022 for threatening violence and bullying behaviour.
- The tribunal found the dismissal was for conduct, not trade union activities, and was reasonable.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began working for the respondent (or predecessor councils).
-
Full-time union release
The claimant became full-time branch secretary of UNISON Kirklees branch.
-
Meeting with Stewart Jackson
The claimant allegedly threatened violence during a meeting with Stewart Jackson and Kath McHendry.
-
Meeting with Wendy Ellis
The claimant had a meeting with Wendy Ellis that left her very upset; she later complained of bullying.
-
First complaint
Wendy Ellis sent a complaint to UNISON Regional Secretary, copied to the respondent.
-
Suspension
The claimant was suspended from work pending investigation.
-
Second complaint
Kath McHendry made a complaint about the claimant's behaviour.
-
Decision to proceed to disciplinary hearing
Julie Muscroft decided there was a case to answer.
-
Disciplinary hearing begins
The disciplinary hearing before Colin Parr started, lasting 12 days.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct.
-
Tribunal judgment
The employment tribunal dismissed all claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was dismissed because of his trade union activities (which would be automatically unfair) or for conduct, and if for conduct, whether the dismissal was reasonable under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims, including unfair dismissal and detriment for trade union activities.
The key reasons were:
- The dismissing officer genuinely believed the claimant had committed gross misconduct based on the evidence.
- The disciplinary process was thorough, including an external investigation and a 12-day hearing.
- There was no evidence that the claimant's union role was the reason for dismissal.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Even long-serving employees can be fairly dismissed for gross misconduct if the employer follows a thorough process.
- A claim of automatic unfair dismissal for trade union activities requires evidence that the union role was the principal reason for dismissal — not just a background factor.
- Employers who commission external investigations and hold lengthy disciplinary hearings are more likely to be seen as acting reasonably.
- Threats of violence and bullying behaviour are likely to be treated as gross misconduct, regardless of the employee's role or length of service.
A union official held to account
This case shows that even the most senior union representatives are not immune from disciplinary action when serious allegations of bullying and threatening behaviour arise. The claimant had been a full-time UNISON branch secretary since 1998 and had worked for the council since 1973. When two fellow union officers complained about his behaviour — one alleging a threat of violence, the other describing a meeting that left her very upset — the council acted swiftly.
What the employer did right
The council suspended the claimant and appointed an external investigator, which helped avoid any suggestion of bias. The disciplinary hearing lasted 12 days, giving the claimant ample opportunity to respond. The dismissing officer, Colin Parr, considered all the evidence and concluded that two allegations of gross misconduct were proven. The tribunal noted that Mr Parr's decision was based on a genuine belief formed after a thorough process.
Why the tribunal rejected the union activity claim
The claimant argued that his dismissal was automatically unfair because it was due to his trade union activities. However, the tribunal found no evidence that his union role was the principal reason for dismissal. The complaints came from other union officers, not management, and the council's process was consistent with how it would treat any employee facing similar allegations. The tribunal also noted that the claimant's union role had been accommodated for decades without issue.
What this means for similar cases
This case is a reminder that the right to engage in trade union activities does not give union officials carte blanche to behave in an abusive or threatening manner. Employers who can show they followed a fair process and genuinely believed in the misconduct will usually succeed in defending a claim. For employees, it highlights the importance of maintaining professional conduct even when acting in a union capacity.
Similar cases
Healthcare consultant dismissed for gross misconduct after customer complaints: race discrimination claims rejected
A healthcare consultant with 6 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct following four customer complaints about his attitude. The tribunal also rejected his claims of race discrimination and victimisation.
22-year service host dismissed for theft: Asda's decision upheld as fair
An employment tribunal has upheld Asda's dismissal of a service host with 22 years' service after CCTV showed her taking coins and bags for life without paying. The tribunal found the decision was within the range of reasonable responses.
Sales agent dismissed for taking photo of colleague's email: conduct dismissal upheld
A sales agent who photographed a colleague's email and sent it to her husband was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct, the Reading Employment Tribunal has ruled.
Constructive dismissal claim fails after final written warning for bullying and safety breaches
A Service Delivery Manager who resigned after receiving a final written warning for bullying and safety violations lost his constructive dismissal claim. The tribunal found no breach of contract and dismissed all discrimination claims.