Claimant v Mitie Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe the claimant failed to intervene when lift doors were opened, failed to manage the situation adequately, failed to ensure barriers or signs were put up, failed in his duty of care to passengers, and brought the respondent into disrepute. Dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses given the conduct found.
The tribunal found that while the claimant's handling of the situation could be criticised, his conduct was not so grave and weighty as to amount to repudiatory breach justifying summary dismissal. He could have been demoted or retrained instead. His actions did not constitute gross misconduct objectively assessed.
The claimant succeeded in his claim for 20 days (4 weeks) accrued but untaken annual leave under Regulations 13 & 14 WTR 1998. The tribunal found he had not been given reasonable opportunity to take leave and had been on sick leave. However, the claim for Regulation 13A additional leave failed as conditions for carry-forward were not met.
The tribunal found the claimant was not dismissed by reason of redundancy but for conduct. The redundancy consultation process that was ongoing was coincidental and the reason for dismissal was the lift entrapment incident.
Facts
The claimant was a Security Manager with 22 years' service who transferred to the respondent via TUPE in September 2022. On 13 July 2023, a lift entrapment incident occurred at the Bentall Centre shopping mall where customers including an infant were trapped for 1 hour 40 minutes. The claimant, acting as Duty Manager, attended the scene but failed to intervene when lift doors were opened without power being turned off, failed to ensure barriers/signage were placed after the incident (resulting in further customers becoming trapped), prioritised dealing with a water spill over customer aftercare, and failed to report the incident. The client raised serious concerns about the claimant's management of the incident.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding that dismissal was within the band of reasonable responses given the serious health and safety failures and bringing the company into disrepute. However, the wrongful dismissal claim succeeded as the conduct did not objectively amount to gross misconduct justifying summary dismissal. The holiday pay claim partly succeeded for 4 weeks' statutory leave but not additional leave. The redundancy payment claim failed as dismissal was for conduct not redundancy.
Practical note
A dismissal can be procedurally and substantively fair for unfair dismissal purposes (band of reasonable responses test) but still be wrongful dismissal because the conduct does not objectively amount to repudiatory breach warranting summary dismissal without notice.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2302599/2024
- Decision date
- 23 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Mitie Limited
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Security Manager
- Service
- 22 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No