Claimant v ICTS (UK) Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the reason for dismissal was not that the claimant asserted a statutory right regarding health and safety. The claimant alleged on 1 September 2022 that the respondent breached health and safety duties by failing to ensure proper controls over the security server and bodycams, but this was not the reason or principal reason for his dismissal.
The tribunal found the dismissal was for some other substantial reason (third party pressure from the NHS Trust). However, the respondent failed to follow a fair procedure. Specifically, the respondent did not provide meaningful assistance to the claimant in finding alternative employment within the company. The respondent simply told him to look at vacancies on the website without proactive support, which was compounded by the claimant's known anxiety. This fell outside the range of reasonable responses.
The tribunal found two periods were challenged: (1) unpaid suspension from 12 May to 9 June 2022 during police bail conditions, and (2) statutory sick pay only from 1 August to 12 September 2022. The tribunal held that clause 23.4 of the contract gave the respondent the right to suspend with or without pay, and that the bail conditions themselves prevented the claimant from working. During sick leave, the contract and handbook only entitled the claimant to statutory sick pay, not full pay.
Facts
The claimant was a security supervisor at Croydon University Hospital. On 12 May 2022, he and 15 other security staff were arrested by police in connection with allegations of perverting the course of justice relating to misuse of CCTV/bodycam footage. The claimant was placed on unpaid suspension during his bail conditions (12 May to 9 June 2022), then paid suspension. The NHS Trust refused to allow any staff under investigation to return to site. The respondent held an investigation meeting on 29 June 2022 and offered the claimant the opportunity to apply for alternative vacancies on their website, but provided no meaningful assistance. The claimant went on sick leave from 1 August 2022 due to anxiety and was dismissed on 12 September 2022 for some other substantial reason (third party pressure).
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal was for some other substantial reason (third party pressure from the NHS Trust), not automatic unfair dismissal for asserting a statutory right. However, the dismissal was procedurally unfair because the respondent failed to provide meaningful assistance in finding alternative employment, simply directing the claimant to vacancies online without proactive support. This was compounded by the respondent's knowledge of the claimant's anxiety. The claim for unlawful deduction of wages failed as the contract permitted unpaid suspension and only entitled the claimant to statutory sick pay during absence.
Practical note
Employers facing third party pressure to dismiss must not only attempt to find alternative employment but must provide meaningful, proactive assistance to the employee in doing so, especially where the employee has disclosed mental health difficulties such as anxiety.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2304831/2022
- Decision date
- 24 September 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Security Supervisor
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep