Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+

DisciplineLatest NewsDiscipline and grievancesDismissalEmployment tribunals

Distillery worker wins wrongful dismissal claim after wee ‘dram’a

by Ashleigh Webber 3 Nov 2021
by Ashleigh Webber 3 Nov 2021 The claimant worked at William Grant and Sons Distillery, which produces Glenfiddich whisky
Shutterstock
The claimant worked at William Grant and Sons Distillery, which produces Glenfiddich whisky
Shutterstock

A distillery worker who was sacked for allegedly urinating on a whisky barrel has been awarded more than £11,000 because the organisation had no proof the incident took place.

Mr Wilson, a spirit supply operative at William Grant and Sons Distillers’ Girvan distillery in Ayrshire, had worked at the firm for 31 years at the time of his dismissal in December 2019.

On 20 November 2019, a pool of urine was discovered on the floor around the area of empty casks in the spirit blend and fill area of the distillery. The urine was discovered in the “C line” area, whereas the claimant worked in the “D line” area.

A sample was sent to a laboratory for testing and it was confirmed to be consistent with urine, although it had been contaminated with cleaning fluid.

Video footage of the claimant showed that he passed through the C line area to get to his work station, although this was not the most direct route. It was claimed he had been seen between two pallets.

It was alleged that he had urinated on a spirit storage cask when he passed through the area, and he was suspended with pay on 25 November 2019 while the incident was investigated. No date of the alleged urination was provided.

Gross misconduct

What is gross misconduct?

How to handle gross misconduct dismissals

Wilson attended an investigation meeting with a union representative on 3 December 2019. He denied that he had urinated in the empty cask area and said had been in the area as he wanted a change of scenery on his way back from his lunch break.

Asked why he had been seen between two pallets, he claimed he had been distracted by a small bird between the pallets and wanted to make sure there had not been any contamination.

Several colleagues were interviewed in early December, and on 6 December 2019 Wilson was invited to another investigatory interview. He was told that a urine deodoriser had been found at his workstation, which he said he thought was cleaning spray.

On 17 December 2019 Wilson attended a formal disciplinary hearing and was told that the allegation against him amounted to gross misconduct and, if proven, could lead to his dismissal. He was given an opportunity to put forward his version of events and repeated his claim that he had walked between the two pallets, rather than the passageway at the side, because he had seen a bird in the area.

He was dismissed with immediate effect at the conclusion of the meeting. A subsequent appeal was dismissed.

Wilson made claims for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal at the employment tribunal and sought more than £68,000 in compensation.

The tribunal dismissed his claim for unfair dismissal, finding that the organisation had followed a fair investigation and appeals procedure. It said that the company had been satisfied that gross misconduct had occurred and that it was entitled to dismiss him without notice pay.

However, when considering whether Wilson’s dismissal was wrongful, the tribunal said that the onus was on the organisation to convince the tribunal panel that the claimant did in fact urinate. It found that no direct evidence of the incident had been presented to the tribunal and questioned why a witness who had provided statements during the investigation had not been called as a witness at the hearing.

“The tribunal’s approach is not the same as in a complaint of unfair dismissal. It is not sufficient for the employer to demonstrate a reasonable belief that the employee was guilty of gross misconduct. They must establish that the claimant did the act of misconduct alleged,” employment judge Ian McPherson said in the written judgment.

“As such, the respondents have failed to prove to the tribunal’s satisfaction that the claimant did, in fact, urinate, as alleged. Reasonable belief in his guilt, which is relevant for the unfair dismissal complaint, does not suffice for them to prove that they had grounds for his summary dismissal for gross misconduct.”

Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Wilson was awarded £11,264.76 in compensation – the 12 weeks’ notice pay he should have received.

Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today


Browse more human resources jobs

Ashleigh Webber

Ashleigh is a former editor of OHW+ and former HR and wellbeing editor at Personnel Today. Ashleigh's areas of interest include employee health and wellbeing, equality and inclusion and skills development. She has hosted many webinars for Personnel Today, on topics including employee retention, financial wellbeing and menopause support.

previous post
CIPD ACE: HR faces ‘once in a lifetime’ opportunity to reshape work
next post
Depression and anxiety common among rail workers in pandemic

You may also like

Sleeping security officer wins £20k for unfair dismissal

16 Jun 2025

Lawyers warn over impact of Employment Rights Bill...

13 Jun 2025

Top 10 HR questions May 2025: Failure to...

2 Jun 2025

Missing mug leads to failed race discrimination claim

29 May 2025

‘Polygamous working’ is a minefield for HR

14 May 2025

Apprentice with ADHD was fairly dismissed after lunch...

10 Apr 2025

Ben & Jerry’s accuses Unilever for sacking boss...

20 Mar 2025

Top 10 HR questions February 2025: Supporting employees...

4 Mar 2025

Up to 74,000 women forced out of work...

27 Feb 2025

Countess of Chester NHS chair resigns after damning...

17 Feb 2025

  • Empowering working parents and productivity during the summer holidays SPONSORED | Businesses play a...Read more
  • AI is here. Your workforce should be ready. SPONSORED | From content creation...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
OHW+
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Wellbeing
    • Recruitment & retention
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise
  • OHW+