Dismissed for breaching a COT3 agreement: tribunal finds employer's belief unreasonable

A dismissal that went too far

This case shows how an employer's failure to consider the full context of an employee's actions can make a conduct dismissal unfair. The claimant, a Customer Care Assistant with 10 years' service, was dismissed for breaching a management instruction not to raise matters settled by a COT3 agreement. The tribunal found that while the employer genuinely believed the claimant had breached the instruction, that belief was not reasonable because it did not examine the context of each alleged breach.

What the employer could have done differently

The employer could have avoided this outcome by taking a more nuanced approach. Instead of treating every communication as a breach, it should have considered whether the claimant was genuinely raising new issues or simply seeking clarification. A more thorough investigation, including looking at the content of the emails in context, might have led to a different conclusion. The tribunal also noted that the claimant's long service and unblemished record should have been given more weight.

Why this matters for similar claims

This case is a reminder that even when an employee has signed a settlement agreement, employers cannot assume that any subsequent communication is automatically a breach. The context matters, and a fair process requires a careful assessment of each situation. The 50% Polkey reduction also highlights that even when a dismissal is unfair, compensation can be reduced if there was a chance the employee could have been fairly dismissed. For employees, this case underscores the importance of keeping clear records of communications and seeking advice before raising concerns that might be seen as breaching a settlement.