Janitor dismissed for unauthorised absences caught on CCTV: gross misconduct upheld
A janitor with six years' service was fairly dismissed after CCTV and fob data showed he spent extended periods away from his post. The tribunal rejected his unfair dismissal claim.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a janitor from 2017 until dismissal in October 2022.
- CCTV footage over five random days showed the claimant spending extended periods in the residents' room and off site without explanation.
- The claimant's security fob data showed he did not attend Altrincham Tower daily as required.
- The claimant had a clean disciplinary record and a back injury requiring rest breaks.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct after a disciplinary hearing and appeal, citing loss of trust and confidence.
- The tribunal found the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe misconduct occurred and followed a fair process overall.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
The claimant started working for the respondent as a janitor.
-
Moved to Lakeside area
The claimant was assigned to Australia Tower and three floors of Altrincham Tower.
-
First day of CCTV review
Mr Longford began reviewing CCTV footage for random dates, starting with 27 June 2022.
-
Investigatory meeting
Mr Longford held an investigatory meeting with the claimant to discuss the CCTV findings.
-
Invitation to disciplinary hearing
The claimant was invited to a disciplinary hearing for gross neglect of duties.
-
Disciplinary hearing
Mr Edwards chaired the disciplinary hearing; the claimant attended with a colleague.
-
Dismissal decision
The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct, effective immediately.
-
Appeal hearing
Mr Wright chaired the appeal hearing; further investigation was promised.
-
Witness interviews
Mr Wright and HR interviewed other janitors and the supervisor.
-
Appeal dismissed
The respondent upheld the dismissal decision.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's belief in the claimant's misconduct was reasonable, whether the investigation was adequate, and whether dismissal was a proportionate response in all the circumstances.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaint of unfair dismissal.
The key reasons were:
- The employer had reasonable grounds to believe the claimant was absent from his duties without authorisation, based on CCTV footage and security fob data over five random days.
- The investigation was thorough, including an investigatory meeting, a disciplinary hearing, and an appeal with further witness interviews.
- The decision to dismiss for gross misconduct due to loss of trust and confidence was within the range of reasonable responses.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can rely on CCTV and electronic access data to evidence misconduct, provided the monitoring is proportionate and disclosed to the employee.
- A clean disciplinary record does not automatically protect an employee from dismissal for gross misconduct if the evidence is strong.
- A fair process includes a proper investigation, a disciplinary hearing, and an appeal – the tribunal will look at the process as a whole.
- Employees should ensure they have clear authorisation for any time away from their post, especially when working alone.
What this case shows in practice
A janitor with six years' service was dismissed after CCTV footage and security fob data revealed he spent long periods in a residents' room and off site without explanation. The employer, Gentoo Group Ltd, concluded that he had neglected his duties and lost trust in him. The tribunal upheld the dismissal as fair, highlighting that employers can use electronic monitoring to check on lone workers, provided the investigation is reasonable.
The claimant had a back injury requiring rest breaks, but the tribunal noted he did not raise this as a defence during the disciplinary process. The employer's investigation included an interview, a disciplinary hearing, and an appeal where further witnesses were interviewed. The tribunal found that the employer genuinely believed the misconduct occurred and that the process was fair overall.
What the losing side could have done differently
From the employer's perspective, the case shows the importance of documenting the rationale for dismissal clearly and ensuring the investigation covers any explanations the employee offers. Here, the employer did that well. For employees, the lesson is to raise any mitigating factors – such as medical needs – at the earliest opportunity, and to cooperate fully with the investigation.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that tribunals will not substitute their own judgment for that of the employer, as long as the employer's decision falls within the 'range of reasonable responses'. It also confirms that a single incident or pattern of behaviour can justify dismissal for gross misconduct, even for a long-serving employee with a clean record, if the employer has lost trust and confidence.
Similar cases
PWE sign-off delay: resignation over unauthorised absence meeting was not constructive dismissal
A graduate trainee accountant who resigned after being invited to a disciplinary meeting for unauthorised absence failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the employer's conduct did not breach trust and confidence.
Catering manager with 16 years' service dismissed for alleged theft and bullying: employer's decision upheld
A tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a catering manager who was found guilty of gross misconduct for stealing tea bags and bullying a colleague, ruling that Serco Ltd's investigation and decision were within the range of reasonable responses.
Security officer dismissed for leaving post: unauthorised absences justified gross misconduct
A security officer with six years' service was fairly dismissed after CCTV footage showed he left his post without authorisation on multiple occasions. The tribunal rejected his unfair dismissal claim.
Bus driver dismissed after driving onto pavement to overtake: dismissal fair
A bus driver with 13 years' service was fairly dismissed for gross misconduct after driving onto a pavement to overtake another bus. The tribunal rejected claims of race and religious discrimination.
