Claimant v Asda Stores Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed the claimant for misconduct (allowing inappropriate behaviour with a Section Leader over an 18-month period). The investigation was reasonable, the belief was genuinely held on reasonable grounds, and the decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses. The claimant's position as General Store Manager responsible for setting standards and the extended duration of the conduct justified dismissal.
The tribunal found that the claimant's conduct over an 18-month period as General Store Manager, allowing and engaging in inappropriate behaviour with a Section Leader, amounted to a fundamental breach of his contract. The respondent was therefore entitled to dismiss him without notice for gross misconduct. The claim for notice pay failed on this basis.
Facts
The claimant was a General Store Manager with 29 years' service at Asda's Harpurhey store. Over an 18-month period, he allowed and engaged in inappropriate behaviour with a Section Leader who repeatedly threatened to tweak the claimant's nipples. The claimant claimed he did so to support the colleague's mental health. Following a grievance investigation by another employee, the conduct came to light. The claimant was dismissed for gross misconduct in December 2023 without notice or pay in lieu. He appealed unsuccessfully.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed both claims. It found the dismissal was fair: the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe the claimant committed misconduct, carried out a reasonable investigation, and dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses given the claimant's senior role, the extended duration of conduct, and its impact on store culture. The tribunal also found the conduct amounted to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal, so the wrongful dismissal claim failed.
Practical note
Senior managers who tolerate or engage in inappropriate workplace behaviour over extended periods, even with claimed benign motives, risk dismissal for gross misconduct regardless of long service and clean records, as their conduct fundamentally undermines their ability to manage standards and culture.
Adjustments
The tribunal found the claimant's conduct was culpable and blameworthy. Had the dismissal been unfair, awards would have been reduced by 100% as just and equitable. The claimant allowed and engaged in inappropriate behaviour over 18 months, undermining his ability to manage conduct in the store.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2401910/2024
- Decision date
- 24 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- retail
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- General Store Manager / Store Manager
- Service
- 29 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister