The ET in Reed v CF Fertilisers UK Limited stated in the first line of the judgment: “This is a case about humour at work that has gone wrong.” Reed (R) brought a tea mug to work for his friend and colleague, Mr Lane. The mug had two owls akin to a cartoon on it engaged in conversation which said: “Twit woo who the fuck’s that lanky bitch, the whore, we’re gonna fuck her up, what a liberty” – a reference to Mr Lane’s ex-girlfriend. Ms Conlin, a consultant, was advising on a restructuring. She went to make a cup of tea, saw the mug and made a complaint as she perceived the ‘graffiti conversation’ as being directed at her as she is tall and was reviewing staff and their roles which could lead to redundancies.
R had 20 years’ service and an unblemished record. He agreed the language was offensive and inappropriate, he had forgotten he had brought the mug to work and the employer accepted that he was remorseful. However, having considered that R had brought offensive material into the workplace, the gravity of the words used, the offence caused and the clear breach of company policy, R was dismissed for gross misconduct.
The ET rejected R’s unfair dismissal claim. The ET acknowledged that some employers may have listened to R’s apologies, concluded that he was genuine, accepted that he would never do such a thing again and imposed, perhaps a final written warning. However, the employer has a zero-tolerance approach to such misconduct and this was not borderline material. The employer took time and thought very hard about the decision. The employer’s own procedure was very clear that penalties for gross misconduct may include dismissal. Therefore, it could not be said that the employer acted outside the band of reasonable responses.
This update provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Click on the links to access full details. If no link is provided, contact us for more information. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, SM&B cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
