Claimant v Apple Retail UK Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the dismissal unfair because there were no reasonable grounds at the time of dismissal to believe the claimant had committed harassment, sexual or otherwise. The dismissing officer wrongly assumed that taking photographs of a female without consent was inevitably harassment without considering whether anyone was actually offended. The tribunal concluded dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses for taking two non-sexual photographs and sharing them with a limited audience, given the claimant's previous good record and genuine remorse.
Facts
The claimant, a German-speaking employee who moved from Vienna to London for Apple, took two non-sexual photographs of a female colleague without her knowledge and shared them in a small WhatsApp group and with one male colleague, Thomas, who had expressed a crush on her. The claimant immediately deleted the second photo recognising it was wrong. A colleague, Hana, reported concerns to management primarily about comments Thomas had made, not about the photos themselves. The claimant admitted his actions, expressed remorse, and had no previous disciplinary record in five years' service.
Decision
The tribunal found the dismissal unfair. The dismissing officer wrongly concluded the claimant had committed harassment by merely taking photographs of a female without consent, without considering whether anyone was actually offended by the photos themselves. There were no reasonable grounds for a finding of harassment. Dismissal was outside the range of reasonable responses given the non-sexual nature of the photos, limited sharing, the claimant's good record, and genuine remorse. The tribunal applied a 10% reduction for contributory conduct.
Practical note
An employer cannot assume that taking photographs of a colleague without consent automatically constitutes harassment; they must establish that the conduct was unwanted and had the effect of violating dignity or creating a hostile environment, and must properly consider mitigating factors including the employee's good record and genuine remorse before dismissing for alleged gross misconduct.
Adjustments
The tribunal found the claimant's conduct of taking two photographs and sharing them was blameworthy and contributed to dismissal. However, given the photographs were not sexual, not intrusive, and the conduct was not as serious as the employer assumed, a 10% reduction was applied to both basic and compensatory awards.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2214931/2023
- Decision date
- 13 June 2024
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- technology
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Process Analyst, People Planning Operations
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister