Claimant v Transport UK London Bus Limited

Outcome

Facts

The claimant, a bus driver employed since 2017, requested five weeks off in December 2023 to travel to India for medical treatment for chronic back problems. His manager refused the leave request due to staffing needs during a busy period. Despite knowing his leave was unauthorised, the claimant travelled to India as planned on 6 December 2023. The respondent wrote to him three times requesting his return, then convened a disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct (unauthorised absence). The claimant was dismissed without notice on 27 December 2023. He appealed but the appeal officer upheld both the finding of gross misconduct and the dismissal sanction.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. It found the respondent genuinely and reasonably believed the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct by taking unauthorised absence. Unauthorised absence was clearly defined as gross misconduct in the respondent's policy which the claimant knew about. The investigation was reasonable given the claimant admitted he knew leave was refused but went anyway. The procedure was fair including appeal rights. Dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses for a public transport operator managing service delivery, especially given the claimant had a prior attendance warning still in force.

Practical note

Legal authorities cited