The "Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures" has almost certainly helped employers to avoid tribunal proceedings by providing clear but not overly rigid guidance on disciplinary issues. Nevertheless, we still see a substantial number of cases in which employers are found to have breached the Acas code.
Breaches of the Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures: employment tribunal decisions [subscription required]
Employer approached disciplinary process with a "closed mind" In Doyle v European Trade Exhibition Services Ltd, the employment tribunal increased the compensatory award by 10% to reflect the employer's failure to follow the Acas code.
Failure to warn of dismissal risk was significant breach of Acas code In Gurnett v ASOS.com Ltd, the employment tribunal increased compensation by 10% because the employer breached para.9 of the Acas code.
Not dealing with grievance attracts 10% uplift in compensation In Johnson v Shamrock Franchise Management Ltd, the employment tribunal increased compensation by 10% on account of the employer's failure to deal with the employee's grievance in accordance with the Acas code.
Uplift of 15% for "fundamentally flawed" disciplinary process The employment tribunal held in Archer and another v Solvent Resource Management Ltd that the employer unreasonably failed to comply with the Acas code, in particular paras.6, 9 and 26.
Employer's many breaches of Acas code lead to 15% uplift The employer's dismissal process involved extensive procedural and substantive unfairness, held the employment tribunal in O'Farrill v New Manage Ltd t/a Hooks Gym London Shootfighters.
Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures: more employment tribunal decisions [free access]
Directors of Jamie Oliver's Fabulous Feasts sacked for "gross incompetence" were unfairly dismissed In Chadwick and another v Jamie Oliver's Fabulous Feasts Ltd, two directors were held to be guilty of "gross incompetence" in the way in which they ran a joint venture with Jamie Oliver Enterprises Ltd, but succeeded in claiming unfair dismissal because of procedural flaws in the disciplinary process.
Breach of Acas code did not render dismissal for gross misconduct unfair Not all breaches of the "Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures" will render a dismissal unfair, as Awonoiki v Carlisle Security Services Ltd demonstrates.
Tribunal holds that Acas code applies to dismissals for "some other substantial reason" In Cummings v Siemens Communications Ltd, the tribunal held that the Acas code applies to dismissals for "some other substantial reason".
Dismissal due to third-party pressure was unfair and breach of Acas code Pressure from a third party to dismiss an employee can be a fair basis for dismissal, but employers must - according to Dando v Britannia Services Group Ltd - comply with the Acas code.
Unfair for small employer to have one person in charge of whole disciplinary process In Henshaw v Touch Tanning Ltd, a family-run business made the classic mistake of having one person act as "judge, jury and executioner" in a disciplinary procedure against an employee accused of misconduct.
Dismissal rendered unfair by one manager's involvement throughout disciplinary process One manager's involvement throughout a disciplinary process can render an otherwise fair dismissal unfair, as the employer in Doyles-Selvidge v DHL Express (UK) Ltd discovered.
Mechanic unfairly dismissed on the spot contrary to Acas code The employment tribunal in Vickery v Kars of Tiverton Ltd increased the amount of compensation awarded to an unfairly dismissed employee because of his employer's failure to provide a written statement of terms and conditions of employment or to dismiss him in accordance with the Acas code.
Employee's attitude regarding his complaints justified dismissal Campbell v Mitie Managed Services Ltd is a good example of how an employer should deal with an employee who has submitted a complaint against an external party.
Employer not "generous" in dismissing employee with no procedure Is it a defence for an employer, when faced with an unfair dismissal claim, to argue that dismissing an employee without disciplinary proceedings was kinder than following a proper process? The employer in Janjua v Dr Rashid Ahmad Bhatti Pak Health Centre found out the hard way.
Employee who made Nazi salute was unfairly dismissed Wright v St James Security Ltd, which concerns a dismissal for gross misconduct in unusual circumstances, provides a useful example of how tribunals are approaching the issue of compensation under the Acas code.
Multiple breaches of Acas code of practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures The circumstances in Singh v Borgers Ltd show how the hasty completion of a disciplinary process can lead to multiple breaches of the Acas code.
Leave a comment