Claimant v DPD Group UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The claimant made protected disclosures on 13, 20 and 23 August 2021 regarding drug misuse in the workplace, which tended to show criminal offences, health and safety breaches, and deliberate concealment. The tribunal found two detriments proven: Mr Baum's confrontation on 31 August 2021 and Mr Gaddu's dismissive response to death threats on 2 November 2021. Other alleged detriments either did not occur or were not causally linked to the disclosures.
Facts
The claimant, a long-serving Deckhand, raised concerns in August 2021 about drug misuse in the workplace via the respondent's whistleblowing service and in a detailed letter naming numerous employees and managers, including General Manager Lewis Baum and Hub Manager Vijay Gaddu. Drug tests were promptly conducted, resulting in several suspensions and dismissals. On 31 August 2021, Mr Baum confronted the claimant on the shop floor, saying 'I am not on drugs, and you can piss test me' and that the claimant 'could have been smarter about this', with aggressive gesticulation. In October 2021, the claimant received death threats which he reported to police and to Mr Gaddu on 2 November 2021, but Mr Gaddu told him to ignore them and took no workplace protective action. The claimant also had ongoing issues with a colleague, leading to a disciplinary matter and periods of stress-related sickness absence.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant made protected disclosures about drug misuse which reasonably tended to show criminal offences, health and safety dangers, and deliberate concealment, and were in the public interest. Two detriments succeeded: Mr Baum's confrontation on 31 August 2021 was directly caused by the disclosure and improperly suggested the claimant should not have reported as he did; and Mr Gaddu's dismissive response on 2 November 2021 failed to protect the claimant from alleged retaliation, which was partly caused by the disclosure naming Mr Gaddu. Other complaints failed either because the conduct did not occur or was not causally linked to the disclosure. The claimant was awarded £10,000 for injury to feelings plus interest.
Practical note
Senior managers who are implicated in a whistleblower's disclosure must not confront or berate the employee about the disclosure, and must still provide proper protection from alleged workplace retaliation, even if they feel aggrieved by false accusations.
Award breakdown
Vento band: middle
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1301503/2022
- Decision date
- 3 October 2024
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- logistics
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- Deckhand
- Service
- 20 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister