Whistleblowing claim fails: conduct dismissal upheld for walking out of shift twice
A general assistant who walked out of his shift twice and claimed he was dismissed for whistleblowing has lost his unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the real reason was his conduct, not any protected disclosure.
2 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #conduct-dismissal
- #protected-disclosure
- #written-warning
- #walking-out-of-shift
- #holiday-pay
- #itemised-pay-statements
- #statement-of-employment-particulars
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a General Assistant from 12 September 2022 to 24 January 2023.
- On 24 October 2022, the claimant refused to serve a member and left his shift early, receiving a written warning.
- On 17 January 2023, the claimant left his shift early again, claiming diarrhoea, but the tribunal found he did not inform his manager.
- The claimant submitted a grievance on 18 January 2023, alleging bullying and lack of payslips/contract.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant on 24 January 2023 for walking out of his shift a second time.
- The tribunal found the reason for dismissal was conduct, not protected disclosure.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began work as a General Assistant at the indoor bowling club.
-
First shift walk-out
Claimant refused to serve a member over a parking dispute and left his shift early.
-
Written warning issued
Claimant received a formal written warning for refusing service, not accepting a manager's decision, and walking out.
-
Claimant submitted grievance document
Claimant gave a four-page document to Mr Goodyear's wife detailing issues with managers.
-
Second shift walk-out
Claimant left work at 11:59, claiming diarrhoea; tribunal found he did not inform his manager.
-
Formal grievance emailed
Claimant emailed a formal grievance about conduct of Ms Craig and Mr Merton-Smith.
-
Dismissal
Claimant was dismissed after a meeting with Ms Craig for walking out of his shift a second time.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
Claimant filed his ET1 claim form.
-
Hearing
The tribunal hearing took place via video.
-
Judgment issued
Employment Judge Morris issued the reserved judgment dismissing most claims.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's dismissal was automatically unfair because the reason (or principal reason) was that he had made a protected disclosure (whistleblowing), or whether it was for a different reason, such as conduct.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claim for automatic unfair dismissal under section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Key reasons:
- The claimant walked out of his shift on two occasions, receiving a written warning after the first.
- The respondent dismissed him after the second walk-out, which the tribunal accepted was the real reason.
- The claimant's grievance about bullying and lack of payslips was not a protected disclosure as defined by law, or if it was, it was not the reason for dismissal.
The tribunal also dismissed claims for unpaid holiday pay and itemised pay statements, though it noted the respondent had breached its duty to provide a written statement of employment particulars and itemised pay statements, but made no award.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you walk out of a shift without permission, your employer may treat that as misconduct even if you later raise a grievance.
- A protected disclosure must involve a genuine concern about wrongdoing in the public interest — personal grievances about pay or bullying are unlikely to qualify.
- Even if you have made a protected disclosure, your dismissal will only be automatically unfair if the disclosure was the principal reason for the dismissal.
- Short-serving employees (under 2 years) cannot bring an ordinary unfair dismissal claim, but can bring a claim if the reason is automatically unfair (e.g., whistleblowing).
When a walk-out is misconduct, not whistleblowing
This case shows the limits of whistleblowing protection. The claimant, a general assistant at a bowling club, walked out of his shift twice. After the first incident he received a written warning. After the second, he was dismissed. He argued that the real reason for his dismissal was a grievance he had submitted about bullying and missing payslips — which he claimed was a protected disclosure.
The tribunal disagreed. It found that the employer's reason for dismissal was the claimant's conduct: walking out of his shift without informing his manager. The grievance was not a protected disclosure in the legal sense, and even if it were, it was not the reason for the dismissal.
What the employer did right
The employer followed a clear disciplinary process. It gave a written warning after the first walk-out, which put the claimant on notice that further misconduct could lead to dismissal. When the second walk-out occurred, the employer held a meeting and then decided to dismiss. The tribunal accepted that this was a reasonable response to the conduct.
What the claimant could have done differently
The claimant could have avoided dismissal by staying at work or properly reporting his illness. Raising a grievance about pay and bullying did not give him the right to leave his shift. For a whistleblowing claim to succeed, the disclosure must be about a specific legal wrongdoing — such as a health and safety risk or a criminal offence — and must be the real reason for the dismissal.
Why this matters
This case is a reminder that whistleblowing protection is not a shield against disciplinary action for misconduct. Employees who have concerns about their workplace should raise them properly, but they must also comply with reasonable instructions and attendance requirements. The tribunal's decision also highlights that short-serving employees (under two years) cannot claim ordinary unfair dismissal, so they must rely on an automatically unfair reason — which requires strong evidence that the protected disclosure was the principal reason for the dismissal.
Similar cases
Care home manager's whistleblowing claim fails as decision-maker unaware of disclosures
A care home manager who claimed he was automatically unfairly dismissed for raising concerns about resident safety lost his case. The tribunal found the decision-maker did not know about the disclosures and dismissed him for genuine belief in gross misconduct.
Live-in carer wins whistleblowing detriment claim but loses constructive dismissal case
A live-in carer with 32 years' experience won a whistleblowing detriment claim after raising safety concerns, but her constructive dismissal claim failed. She was awarded £1,775.
Nursery chef wins £276 after employer deducted nursery fees without permission
A nursery chef who was dismissed after raising concerns about nursery practices failed in her whistleblowing claims but succeeded in recovering £276.49 that her employer deducted from her wages for outstanding nursery fees without her written consent.
Shouting at a colleague after a final warning: dismissal for conduct upheld
A production worker with a final written warning for threatening behaviour was fairly dismissed after shouting at a colleague. The tribunal also ordered Bighams Ltd to pay £648.96 for unpaid holiday.