Claimant v SIM Switchgear Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
Tribunal found the respondent had a genuine belief that the claimant committed gross misconduct by failing to follow a reasonable management instruction to attend work on 27-29 December 2023 despite knowing he had not obtained authority for unpaid leave. The investigation was reasonable, procedure was fair, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses given the claimant's disingenuous conduct and loss of trust.
Tribunal determined the claimant intentionally failed to raise the leave issue with management and refused to follow a reasonable management instruction. This conduct undermined the relationship of trust and confidence and amounted to gross misconduct such that the respondent was entitled to dismiss without notice.
Respondent paid additional holiday pay to the claimant following a Supreme Court decision on calculation of holiday pay for variable hours workers. Claim no longer pursued at the final hearing.
Claim resolved and no longer pursued by the claimant at the outset of the final hearing.
Facts
The claimant, a senior electrical technician employed since 2013, was dismissed without notice for gross misconduct after refusing to work on 27-29 December 2023. He had exhausted his annual leave entitlement and had pre-allocated unpaid leave over Christmas, but had not obtained management approval to take that leave. The respondent required him to work on an urgent client job that required four engineers and had allocated him as lead engineer by 13 December 2023. Despite being instructed by four managers to attend work, the claimant insisted his unpaid leave had been approved and refused to attend, causing financial loss to the business.
Decision
The Tribunal found the dismissal was fair. The respondent conducted a reasonable investigation, had a genuine belief based on reasonable grounds that the claimant committed gross misconduct by disobeying a reasonable management instruction. The claimant knew from early December about the job but disingenuously failed to raise childcare issues until the last minute. His refusal to attend work caused financial and potential reputational loss and destroyed trust and confidence. Dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses and there was no wrongful dismissal as the conduct amounted to gross misconduct.
Practical note
In small businesses with limited resources, senior employees who deliberately ignore clear management instructions causing financial and reputational harm can be fairly dismissed for gross misconduct even where they claim confusion over pre-allocated but unapproved unpaid leave.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2402189/2024
- Decision date
- 23 June 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- manufacturing
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Electrical Technician (Field Service Engineer)
- Service
- 11 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No