A chef dismissed from his job at a nursery has been awarded £34,000 in compensation after he was accused of ‘snubbing’ colleagues by not making them biscuits and burning a child’s cake.
Mr Harding worked for Bright Horizons nursery in Wokingham, and had made heart-shaped biscuits for Valentine’s Day in 2020. He offered them to staff, but a tribunal heard that he had “deliberately” left out two staff members because he didn’t like them.
Harding was later dismissed for misconduct due to this incident and a number of others, including an allegation he intentionally burnt and threw away a cake that children had made for one of the managers.
The tribunal also heard that the claimant had locked a member of staff in a toilet cubicle making it impossible for them to leave, or had obstructed the outside of toilet doors so employees could not leave, causing them distress.
Harding brought claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, victimisation and direct sex discrimination to the tribunal. He alleged that a “clique” of female bosses had colluded to force him out of his job.
The judge held that Harding had been unfairly dismissed because a workplace investigation into his behaviour had not been in the range of reasonable responses.
Workplace investigations
How to conduct a workplace investigation
Dismissal after homophobic remarks was unfair due to investigation flaws
Banker unfairly dismissed after ‘unjustifiable’ delays investigation
It said the claimant had not been provided with relevant information and that his employer “irrationally disregarded argument and evidence which had the potential to exculpate him”.
The tribunal also found that the incidents that led to Harding’s dismissal were “comparatively trivial” on their own, but could collectively be perceived as targeting individuals, “but they did not have the potential to amount to gross misconduct either singly or collectively”.
A claim of victimisation was upheld after Harding was placed on a performance improvement plan (PIP) in March 2020, shortly before being placed on furlough due to the pandemic. The tribunal found there was “an absence of any explanation for the imposition of the PIP”, and that his improvement plan included issues that could have been resolved informally or through better communication.
In her judgment, employment judge Sarah George said that while Harding had obviously shown distaste for some of his colleagues, “no reasonable employer” could have disciplined an employee for the behaviour he was alleged to have engaged in.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Harding was awarded £33,667, including £19,000 for injury to feelings.
HR business partner opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more HR business partner jobs
