Claimant v The Salvation Army Trustee Company
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses. The claimant made a racist comment ('send them all back on a fucking boat') about refugees. Despite his apology, the employer reasonably concluded this was gross misconduct inconsistent with organisational values and destroyed trust. The investigation was fair, alternatives were considered, and dismissal was proportionate given the comment's seriousness and his role supporting vulnerable people including refugees.
The claimant alleged his female manager made a sexual comment about his genitals. The tribunal found the evidence showed the claimant himself had originated the vulgar comment about another employee. The manager's response was a warning about professionalism. The claimant raised this only at appeal stage to deflect from his own misconduct. The manager's evidence was credible and corroborated; the claimant's was not reliable.
The harassment claim related to the same alleged comment by the manager. The tribunal found this did not occur. The comment originated from the claimant, not his manager. He made no complaint at the time or during the disciplinary hearing, only raising it at appeal. The manager strenuously denied it and her account was corroborated by witnesses. The claim was not established on the facts.
Facts
The claimant, a Social Services Worker with 19 years' service supporting homeless and vulnerable people including refugees, was dismissed for gross misconduct. During a staff meeting on 5 March 2024, when discussing housing shortages, he stated 'send them all back on a fucking boat' referring to 150 refugees. Colleagues were shocked. When challenged about a Syrian service user, he said 'yes the lot of them'. He had received diversity training and was subject to policies requiring respect for human rights. He was dismissed after investigation, disciplinary hearing and appeal, all of which concluded his comment was racist, breached multiple policies, and destroyed trust.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the employer's belief the comment was racist and constituted gross misconduct was reasonable, the investigation was fair, alternatives were considered, and dismissal fell within the band of reasonable responses given the claimant's role, the organisational values, and lack of genuine insight despite apology. The discrimination and harassment claims failed because the alleged sexual comment by his manager did not occur; the claimant himself had made the vulgar comment and raised the allegation only to deflect from his misconduct.
Practical note
A single racist comment can constitute gross misconduct justifying dismissal where it fundamentally contradicts organisational values and the employee's role involves supporting the very group disparaged, even with long service and no disciplinary record, particularly where the employee shows limited insight.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8001635/2024
- Decision date
- 4 November 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- charity
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Social Services Worker (Support Worker)
- Service
- 19 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor