Claimant v Blanc Aero Industries UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent failed to carry out a reasonable investigation, did not follow its own disciplinary procedures (including failing to refer the matter to the claimant's manager as required), and predetermined the decision to dismiss before the resumed disciplinary hearing. The dismissal was outside the band of reasonable responses despite the serious nature of the misconduct, because the procedure was fundamentally flawed and failed to properly engage with the claimant's defence of workplace banter culture.
Facts
The claimant, a production operative with 15 years' service, was dismissed for gross misconduct after making offensive comments including calling a colleague a 'suicide bomber', telling another to 'fuck off back to Poland', making sexual comments to a female colleague, and other inappropriate remarks. The claimant's defence was that there was a widespread culture of workplace banter where people 'gave as good as they got', and that the complaint was raised maliciously by a departing colleague who was upset about a conversation concerning his eating disorder. The claimant had attended bullying and harassment training in May 2023 and argued the incidents occurred before this training.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal procedurally unfair due to multiple serious flaws: failure to investigate timing of incidents relative to training, failure to follow the employer's own procedures, predetermination of the outcome before the resumed hearing, and failure to properly investigate the claimant's defence of banter culture. However, the tribunal found a 100% Polkey reduction as the claimant would inevitably have been dismissed anyway given the egregious nature of the harassment, and an 80% contributory fault reduction to the basic award for blameworthy conduct. The claimant was awarded £2,764.90 (20% of basic award only).
Practical note
Even where a workplace banter culture exists and dismissal is procedurally unfair, tribunals may still apply 100% Polkey reductions where the misconduct amounts to serious unlawful harassment under the Equality Act 2010, effectively leaving the claimant with only a declaration of unfair dismissal and a heavily reduced basic award.
Award breakdown
Adjustments
Tribunal found claimant would have been dismissed in any event had a fair procedure been followed, given the egregious nature of the comments (suicide bomber, racial and sexual harassment) which amounted to unlawful harassment under the Equality Act 2010. Dismissal would have occurred by the same date.
Claimant's conduct was blameworthy despite workplace banter culture. He had been warned 9 months earlier that not everyone likes such banter and that the language was unacceptable. He nonetheless made extremely serious comments including racial, sexual and religious harassment.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1308533/2023
- Decision date
- 10 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- in house
Employment details
- Role
- Production operative
- Service
- 16 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No