Offensive WhatsApp messages led to fair dismissal but procedural flaws meant no compensation
Two long-serving managers were unfairly dismissed for offensive WhatsApp messages, but a tribunal awarded no compensation because they would have been sacked anyway and their conduct contributed fully.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #whatsapp-group
- #offensive-messages
- #social-media-policy
- #gross-misconduct
- #polkey-reduction
- #contributory-conduct
Key facts
- Both claimants were dismissed on 28 September 2018 for gross misconduct related to offensive WhatsApp messages.
- The WhatsApp group 'Xylem Massacre' contained highly derogatory and sexualised content about women and protected characteristics.
- The respondent failed to provide claimants with a specific list of objectionable messages before disciplinary hearings.
- Dismissals were announced internally before appeals were heard, undermining the appeal process.
- The tribunal found that a fair procedure would have led to the same outcome due to the severity of the misconduct.
- No compensation was awarded because of the claimants' contributory conduct and the Polkey reduction.
Timeline
-
WhatsApp group created
Simon Traylen set up the WhatsApp group 'Xylem Massacre' and invited the claimants and others to join.
-
Investigation started
Simon Traylen attended an investigation meeting for bullying; his phone was handed over, revealing the WhatsApp messages.
-
Investigation letters sent
Claimants received letters inviting them to investigatory meetings regarding offensive WhatsApp messages.
-
Investigatory interviews
Claimants attended investigatory interviews with Martin Greenhalgh and Shabana Pottle.
-
Suspension
Both claimants were suspended pending disciplinary proceedings.
-
Disciplinary hearing invitations
Claimants received letters inviting them to disciplinary hearings scheduled for 24 September 2018.
-
RS disciplinary hearing
Mr Sharp's disciplinary hearing took place; he attended without accompaniment and had limited access to the WhatsApp messages.
-
DL disciplinary hearing
Mr Lewis's disciplinary hearing took place; he attended unaccompanied.
-
Dismissal
Both claimants were dismissed by letter for gross misconduct, with immediate effect.
-
RS appeal hearing
Mr Sharp's appeal hearing was conducted by Bernadette Christmas Boulton.
-
DL appeal hearing
Mr Lewis's appeal hearing was conducted by Bernadette Christmas Boulton.
-
Appeal outcomes
Both appeals were rejected in detailed outcome letters.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissals for gross misconduct were fair under section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and if not, whether compensation should be reduced due to a Polkey reduction (that a fair procedure would have led to the same outcome) and contributory conduct.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claims of unfair dismissal but awarded no compensation.
- The dismissals were procedurally unfair because the employer failed to provide a specific list of the offensive WhatsApp messages before the disciplinary hearings, and announced the dismissals internally before appeals were heard, undermining the appeal process.
- However, the tribunal applied a 100% Polkey reduction, finding that a fair procedure would still have resulted in dismissal due to the severity of the misconduct.
- Additionally, a 100% contributory conduct reduction was applied, meaning it would not be just and equitable to award any basic or compensatory award.
- No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers must provide employees with specific details of alleged misconduct before disciplinary hearings, especially when messages are numerous and not all are objectionable.
- Announcing dismissals internally before appeals are concluded undermines the fairness of the appeal process and can render a dismissal procedurally unfair.
- Even if a dismissal is procedurally unfair, tribunals may award no compensation if they find the employee would have been dismissed anyway and their conduct contributed entirely to the outcome.
- Long-serving employees are not immune from dismissal for gross misconduct, especially when messages contain highly derogatory content about protected characteristics.
A WhatsApp group that cost two careers
Two senior managers with decades of service were dismissed after participating in a WhatsApp group called 'Xylem Massacre' that contained highly offensive and sexualised messages about women and protected characteristics. The tribunal found the content was 'truly shocking' and clearly breached the employer's social media and code of conduct policies.
Where the process went wrong
The employer's investigation and disciplinary process had significant flaws. Crucially, the claimants were not given a specific list of the objectionable messages before their disciplinary hearings. With hundreds of messages exchanged over months, it was unreasonable to expect them to guess which ones were considered gross misconduct. The employer also announced the dismissals internally before the appeals were heard, which the tribunal said 'fatally undermined' the appeal process.
Why no compensation was awarded
Despite finding the dismissals procedurally unfair, the tribunal applied a 100% Polkey reduction, meaning a fair procedure would have led to the same outcome. The misconduct was so severe that no reasonable employer would have retained them. Additionally, a 100% contributory conduct reduction was applied because the claimants' own actions in sending and receiving the messages were entirely blameworthy. As a result, no compensation was payable.
What this means for similar cases
This case shows that even when an employer gets the procedure wrong, employees can still recover nothing if the misconduct is serious enough. It highlights the importance of providing specific details of allegations in disciplinary proceedings, and not prejudging appeals. For employees, it is a stark reminder that offensive private messages on work devices can lead to dismissal, regardless of length of service or seniority.
Similar cases
Area manager dismissed for editing timesheet: procedural failures led to unfair dismissal finding
An area manager was unfairly dismissed after editing a timesheet, but the tribunal found the investigation was flawed and the disciplinary process lacked proper notice. He was awarded £8,026 after reductions for contributory conduct and a Polkey finding.
Car valet dismissed for abusive language: procedural unfairness but no compensation awarded
A car valet with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after using foul language towards a colleague, but the tribunal awarded no compensation because his conduct wholly caused his dismissal.
Night care assistant dismissed for sleeping on duty: unfair dismissal for lack of disciplinary hearing
A night care assistant with five years' service was unfairly dismissed after being seen asleep on duty, because her employer did not hold a disciplinary hearing before sacking her. The tribunal awarded £962.79, reduced by 75% for her contributory conduct.
Tanker driver dismissed for delayed incident report: procedural failure but fair outcome
A tanker driver was unfairly dismissed after failing to report dropping a hose on her foot, but the tribunal found she would have been dismissed anyway, awarding only £807.