Claimant v Royal Mail Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed for conduct, a potentially fair reason. The respondent acted reasonably in treating deliberate removal of a tachograph card as sufficient reason for dismissal. The respondent carried out an adequate investigation, formed a genuine belief on reasonable grounds that the claimant was guilty of gross misconduct, and the decision to dismiss fell within the band of reasonable responses given the potential criminal consequences and the claimant's previous training on tachograph use.
The tribunal concluded the claimant's dismissal had nothing whatsoever to do with his disability (PTSD). The respondent made adjustments to allow participation in the disciplinary process in alternative formats. The dismissal was for deliberate misconduct on 22 January 2022, which had no connection to the claimant's disability. A hypothetical comparator without disability but otherwise unable to participate in the process would not have been treated more favourably. The burden of proof did not shift to the respondent as there was no evidential basis from which discrimination could be inferred.
Facts
The claimant, an HGV driver employed by Royal Mail since 1996 with PTSD from a 2014 workplace trauma, was dismissed for gross misconduct after allegedly deliberately removing his tachograph card on 22 January 2022 to avoid taking a required break when close to base. He denied this, claiming the card ejected itself. The claimant did not participate in the lengthy disciplinary process (January 2022 to August 2023), citing his PTSD as making him unable to attend meetings or answer questions, despite the respondent offering multiple adjusted formats including written submissions and union representation. Medical evidence confirmed PTSD but did not clearly support complete inability to participate.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims. The unfair dismissal claim failed because the tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the claimant did deliberately remove the card (accepting evidence from two managers about admissions he made), the respondent had reasonable grounds for belief after adequate investigation, and dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses given potential criminal liability. The disability discrimination claim failed because the dismissal had nothing to do with the claimant's PTSD—it was for deliberate misconduct unconnected to his disability—and the respondent had made reasonable adjustments throughout.
Practical note
An employer can fairly dismiss an employee who refuses to engage with a disciplinary process despite offered adjustments, where the employer waits a reasonable time for medical fitness and then proceeds based on available evidence including contemporaneous notes of admissions.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3303877/2023
- Decision date
- 19 July 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- logistics
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- HGV/lorry driver
- Service
- 28 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor