A model letter to notify an employee who has failed to respond to previous requests to provide a doctor's statement of fitness for work for a period of sickness absence lasting more than seven days that the matter is now to be treated as unauthorised absence leading to disciplinary action.
The High Court has held that an employer breached its implied duty of trust and confidence towards an employee who was not allowed to be accompanied at a disciplinary investigation by his choice of companion.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that procedural defects in an employee's dismissal for allegedly bullying a colleague who "unfriended" her on Facebook could be cured during the appeal stage.
In Jinadu v Docklands Buses Ltd EAT/0434/14, the EAT held that an employee was not entitled to have her disciplinary proceedings suspended while the employer considered a grievance that she had raised about her treatment. However, the case was remitted because the tribunal had failed to make clear findings as to whether she was dismissed for gross misconduct or for poor performance.
In Way v Spectrum Property Care Ltd  IRLR 657 CA, the Court of Appeal held that an employer cannot rely on a warning on an employee's file that was given in bad faith, alongside later misconduct, when deciding that there is sufficient reason to dismiss. To do so would be outside the range of reasonable responses, and not in accordance with equity and the substantial merits of the case.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a dismissal was fair despite flaws in the first stage of the disciplinary process and in the composition of an appeal panel.
In McMillan v Airedale NHS Foundation Trust  IRLR 803 CA, the Court of Appeal held that the NHS had no contractual right to increase a disciplinary sanction on a doctor's internal appeal against that sanction.
In Thomson v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust EAT/0218/14, the EAT upheld an employment tribunal's ruling that a conduct dismissal was unfair because the chair of the disciplinary panel had no training or experience in the role, and he impermissibly dismissed for what amounted to serious but not gross misconduct. The employee had, however, failed to establish that there was any failure to make reasonable adjustments.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to discipline.