Cases1400336/2024

Claimant v Avon Fire & Rescue Service

30 September 2025Before Employment Judge WoodheadBristolin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found that the alleged breaches, neither individually nor cumulatively, amounted to conduct calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. The Respondent had reasonable and proper cause for its actions. The disciplinary process relating to the claimant's failure to challenge sexist banter and failure to intervene when a subordinate manager acted inappropriately towards a female colleague was reasonable. The sanctions imposed, including a final written warning, removal of CPD payments, role change, and performance improvement plan, were not disproportionate given the seriousness of the findings and the claimant's senior managerial position. The tribunal rejected allegations that the investigation was misleading or the disciplinary process fundamentally flawed.

Discrimination Arising from Disability (s.15)(disability)withdrawn

The disability discrimination complaints were dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant prior to the final hearing.

Facts

The claimant was a Watch Manager B with nearly 27 years' service at Avon Fire & Rescue Service. Following a formal grievance by a female firefighter (SA) alleging sexist culture and inappropriate handling of complaints against a crew manager, an external investigation found the claimant had failed to challenge sexist jokes and banter on his watch and had mishandled a mediation meeting in July 2021 where a crew manager behaved in a mildly aggressive manner towards SA. The claimant was subject to a Stage 3 disciplinary hearing, found to have committed misconduct, and sanctioned with a final written warning, loss of CPD payments for 12 months, transfer from operational to office role, and a performance improvement plan. The claimant resigned claiming constructive dismissal, alleging he was misled during investigation and that sanctions were disproportionate.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found that the Respondent did not breach the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. The claimant knew or should have known that the grievance investigation could lead to disciplinary proceedings against him. The disciplinary process was fair, the findings were reasonable based on evidence of sexist banter on the claimant's watch and his failure to intervene when a subordinate manager acted inappropriately. The sanctions imposed, while serious, were proportionate given the claimant's senior managerial position and the importance the Respondent placed on inclusive workplace culture. The tribunal found the Respondent had reasonable and proper cause for its actions.

Practical note

An employer does not breach trust and confidence by imposing serious disciplinary sanctions (including final written warning, role change, and pay reduction) on a senior manager who failed to challenge sexist workplace culture and mishandled a workplace conflict, provided the process is fair and the sanctions are proportionate to the misconduct and the manager's responsibilities for workplace culture.

Legal authorities cited

Malik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International [1998] AC 20Western Excavating v Sharp [1978] ICR 221Omilaju v Waltham Forest LBC [2005] IRLR 35Kaur v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 978Leeds Dental Team v Rose [2014] IRLR 8Hilton v Shiner Ltd [2001] IRLR 727BBC v Beckett [1983] IRLR 43Stanley Cole (Wainfleet) Ltd v Sheridan [2003] IRLR 52Mari v Reuters Ltd [2015] UKEAT/0539/13

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.98

Case details

Case number
1400336/2024
Decision date
30 September 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Watch Manager B
Service
27 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister