Claimant v Buckinghamshire Fire and Rescue Service
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the claimant's dismissal for making misogynistic and derogatory comments about a female casualty was unfair because the respondent took into account irrelevant factors (expired file note, PDPs, and an informal meeting), which materially influenced the decision and led to an erroneous conclusion that the claimant's behaviour was not isolated. The respondent also erroneously concluded the claimant had made a 'pull a pig' comment directly about the casualty, and that he had changed his story. While the claimant's misconduct was serious and the dismissal would have been within the band of reasonable responses absent these features, their cumulative effect rendered the dismissal unfair.
Facts
The claimant, a crew commander with 17 years' service in the fire service, was dismissed for gross misconduct after making inappropriate comments about a female casualty at a meeting on 22 December 2022. The comments related to her age and appearance and included the phrase 'pull a pig' in the context of discussing her. The respondent conducted an investigation and dismissed him summarily. The claimant accepted misconduct but argued the dismissal was unfair due to procedural and substantive flaws, including the respondent taking into account an expired 2017 file note, performance development plans, and an informal 2022 meeting, all of which were irrelevant or should have been disregarded.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant was unfairly dismissed. While the misconduct was serious and dismissal could have been fair, the respondent unfairly took into account irrelevant past matters (an expired file note, PDPs, and an informal meeting) which materially influenced the decision by making the conduct appear non-isolated and suggesting previous interventions had failed. The respondent also erroneously concluded the 'pull a pig' comment was directly about the casualty. These cumulative flaws rendered the dismissal unfair. The tribunal reduced both basic and compensatory awards by 65% for the claimant's contributory conduct but made no Polkey reduction.
Practical note
Employers must not rely on expired disciplinary records or unrelated performance matters when deciding to dismiss for misconduct, particularly where their own policies require such matters to be disregarded, as this can materially and unfairly influence the decision and render an otherwise potentially fair dismissal unfair.
Adjustments
The claimant's blameworthy conduct (making inappropriate and sexist comments about a female casualty) contributed significantly to his dismissal. He was not largely to blame (which would be 75%), nor were the parties equally at fault (50%). The tribunal considered 65% just and equitable, applying to both basic and compensatory awards.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3308216/2023
- Decision date
- 29 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Crew Commander
- Service
- 17 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister