Cases→6007631/2024

Claimant v The Co-operative Group

27 July 2025Before Employment Judge Jane PorterManchesterremote video

Outcome

Partly successful£10,611

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalsucceeded

The tribunal found that the claimant was not aware of the zero tolerance policy on inappropriate behaviour, had engaged in juvenile behaviour for some time without warnings, and had a clean disciplinary record. The dismissing officer did not consider any penalty other than dismissal and made no finding that the conduct was directed at the complainant or amounted to bullying or harassment. Dismissal did not fall within the band of reasonable responses.

Facts

The claimant was a warehouse operative employed for over 8 years. A colleague SM complained that the claimant had made monkey noises and impersonated Michael Jackson in a racially offensive manner. The claimant was suspended and investigated. At the disciplinary hearing, the claimant admitted making inappropriate and juvenile noises in the workplace but denied they were racist or directed at SM. He was summarily dismissed for breach of the bullying and harassment policy. The claimant had no prior warnings and had not received training on the policy. The claimant walked out of the appeal hearing in anger.

Decision

The tribunal found the dismissal unfair. While the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe the claimant made inappropriate noises, there was no satisfactory evidence that these were directed at SM, amounted to bullying or harassment, or were racially motivated. The claimant was unaware of the zero tolerance policy, had received no warnings, and had a clean record. Summary dismissal did not fall within the band of reasonable responses. However, the tribunal reduced both awards by 50% for contributory conduct as the claimant's behaviour was culpable and blameworthy.

Practical note

Employers relying on zero tolerance policies for summary dismissal must ensure employees are aware of those policies, trained on them, and previously warned about unacceptable conduct, particularly where the misconduct is workplace banter rather than clearly discriminatory behaviour.

Award breakdown

Basic award£2,070
Compensatory award£8,541
Loss of statutory rights£500

Award equivalent: 20.5 weeks' gross pay

Adjustments

Contributory fault50%

The claimant was guilty of culpable and blameworthy conduct – the inappropriate and juvenile noises which were annoying to a number of employees and could have been offensive and humiliating to a number of employees, including SM.

Legal authorities cited

Iceland Frozen Foods v Jones [1983] ICR 17Boys and Girls Welfare Society v McDonald [1997] ICR 693BHS v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379West London Mental Health Trust v Sarkar [2009] IRLR 512Sheffield Health & Social Care NHS Foundation Trust v Crabtree UKEAT/0331/09Post Office v Foley, HSBC Bank plc v Madden [2000] IRLR 827Bentley Engineering Co Limited Mistry [1979] ICR 2000Nixon v Ross Coates Solicitors and anor EAT 0108/10Nelson v BBC (No2) [1979] IRLR 346Gibson v British Transport Docks Board [1982] IRLR 228Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Hitt [2003] ICR 111

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.123(6)ERA 1996 s.98ERA 1996 s.98(4)ERA 1996 s.118-124ERA 1996 s.122(2)ERA 1996 s.123(1)

Case details

Case number
6007631/2024
Decision date
27 July 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
The Co-operative Group
Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep

Employment details

Role
Warehouse Operative
Salary band
£25,000–£30,000
Service
8 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
lay rep
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →