Veitch Penny LLP - Exeter | Crediton, Devon

Case

Boyd v Renfrewshire Council
Court of Session - 11 June 2008

Issues

(1) Dismissal procedures
(2) Gross misconduct
(3) Framing of allegation

Facts

Mr Boyd was employed as a refuse collection driver in August 2007. The Council introduced a new collection route in relation to a new recycling collection programme. The scheme involved longer hours and task-oriented work. The Council's employees objected to the move and took a decision to work to rule. This happened whilst Mr Boyd was on leave.

On his return to work, he was seen driving a refuse collection vehicle without crew. He met with another driver in the same position. The supervisors then found the crew drinking in a local pub. Mr Boyd was later found at an industrial estate nearby with the other more experienced driver, having a snack. It was outside authorised break times.

During the disciplinary procedure, the Council advised Mr Boyd that he was only at risk of a warning. He said that he had been unsure what to do after his crew left his vehicle. He did not mention that he had been threatened by members of the crew not to return to work by colleagues who were involved in the industrial action. He was summarily dismissed by the Council for gross misconduct when he took an unlawful break and failed to complete his work.

Mr Boyd was dismissed for "deliberately and wilfully" taking the break and not finishing his work with the intention to cause disruption. The suggestion that he had been acting "wilfully" was a new allegation and not discussed at the disciplinary meeting.

Mr Boyd made a claim to the Employment Tribunal of unfair dismissal. He was successful. The Council appealed the decision to the Court of Session.

Decision

The Court of Session upheld the Tribunal's earlier decision that he had been unfairly dismissed. It was accepted that Mr Boyd was unaware that he was at risk of dismissal, as it made no mention of gross misconduct, and did not refer to any deliberate intention to disrupt. These issues were not cured on appeal.

Comments

This case demonstrates the importance of not overlooking basic details when dealing with disciplinary and dismissal issues. In this case, it highlights the importance of telling an employee that they are at risk of dismissal and that a decision to dismiss is based on the original allegations.


Rachel Billen - Associate Solicitor, Commercial Department at Veitch Penny.
Tel: 01392 278381, Fax: 01392 410247, Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

This Employment Law Update does not constitute legal or other professional advice and should not be relied on as such. You should take specific advice regarding your circumstances before taking any action based on the information contained within this Update.