Van driver dismissed while on sick leave: final written warning breach upheld

This case shows how a final written warning for attendance issues can pave the way for a fair dismissal, even when the employee is on sick leave. The van driver had been given a 12-month warning after several absences and incorrect reporting. When he was absent four more times within six months, the depot manager dismissed him orally while he was off sick. The tribunal accepted the dismissal was for conduct — breach of the warning — and that the employer acted reasonably.

What the employer did right

The employer had a clear warning in place, and the employee knew the consequences. The tribunal noted that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses, given the short service (2 years 8 months) and the clear breach. The employer's failure to attend the hearing did not help its case on the monetary claims, but on the unfair dismissal issue, the documentary evidence was sufficient.

What went wrong for the employer

Despite winning the unfair dismissal claim, the employer lost on the financial claims. The van driver was not paid his January 2022 salary, notice pay, or accrued holiday. The tribunal ordered the second respondent — the company that had taken over after a name change — to pay £3,507.67. This highlights that even if a dismissal is fair, employers must still meet their statutory obligations to pay what is owed.

Why this matters

For employees with a final written warning, this case is a reminder that the warning can be used as a basis for dismissal if further breaches occur. For employers, it shows the importance of following proper procedures and paying all sums due on termination. The case also clarifies that a company name change does not automatically shield the new entity from liability if it is the true employer.