Claimant v John Steward Transport Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent dismissed the claimant by telling him to 'pack your stuff and go' if he refused to drive a particular lorry. The dismissal was procedurally unfair because the respondent conducted no investigation, engaged in no disciplinary procedure, and failed entirely to address the claimant's genuine concerns about using a remote-controlled crane with which he had little practical experience. The decision to dismiss fell outside the range of reasonable responses available to a reasonable employer.
Facts
The claimant, an HGV driver employed for 5.5 years, arrived at work on 11 October 2022 to find his usual lorry undergoing repair. The workshop manager brusquely ordered him to drive a colleague's lorry equipped with a remote-controlled crane, a type the claimant was qualified to use but had little practical experience with and genuine concerns about. After the claimant refused and a confrontation ensued in which both men squared up to each other, the compliance manager conveyed the director's ultimatum: 'either take the truck out now, or you can pack your stuff and go'. The claimant left and never returned.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed, not resigned. The words 'pack your stuff and go' amounted objectively to dismissal. The dismissal was unfair because the respondent conducted no investigation into the claimant's genuine concerns about using unfamiliar equipment, followed no disciplinary procedure, and gave him no opportunity to respond. Awards reduced by 25% for contributory fault (claimant's confrontational conduct with the manager) but no Polkey reduction as the director's own evidence was he would not have dismissed. 10% ACAS uplift and section 38 award for failure to provide written terms.
Practical note
Even where dismissal arises from confrontation and refusal to follow instructions, wholesale procedural failures—particularly failing to investigate an employee's genuine safety or capability concerns before dismissing—will render the dismissal unfair, though contributory conduct reductions may still apply.
Award breakdown
Adjustments
Claimant contributed to his dismissal by unnecessarily escalating a confrontation with the workshop manager Mr Cole, threatening to knock him out and squaring up to him. However, the tribunal found the majority of fault rested with the respondent.
Respondent wholly breached the ACAS Code on Disciplinary and Grievance Procedures by conducting no procedure whatsoever before dismissing the claimant.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2300351/2023
- Decision date
- 23 February 2024
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- transport
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- HGV driver
- Service
- 6 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No