Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • 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
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • 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
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+

Sexual harassmentDisciplineLatest NewsDismissalEmployment tribunals

Tube worker wins £14k after dismissal delays

by Rob Moss 19 May 2020
by Rob Moss 19 May 2020 Photo: Jeff Blackler/Shutterstock
Photo: Jeff Blackler/Shutterstock

A London Underground worker sacked for sexual harassment has been awarded £14,500 for his employer’s failure to conduct a timely and reasonable disciplinary investigation.

Mr Adenusi’s claim for unfair dismissal was upheld despite London Underground’s decision to dismiss him being found to be reasonable and there being no suggestion of any alternative, ulterior reason for its decision.

London Underground sacked Adenusi, a customer services manager, for gross misconduct following allegations that he made a series of inappropriate comments of a sexual nature to a customer services assistant, “C1”, who had recently transferred to Tottenham Court Road station.

Conducting investigations

How to conduct a disciplinary investigation

During a return-to-work interview (RTWI) on 16 April 2017, it was alleged he said: that it was important that she recovered from her gynaecological surgery as “she would need to please her future husband”; that she looks like she kept fit as you could tell from her body shape; and that when he first met her, he had thought “wow” and had to control his thoughts.

C1 initially said the RTWI lasted two hours but later stated one hour. Adenusi claimed it was 25-35 minutes.

It was also alleged that for three months after the interview Adenusi, who started working on the Tube in 1994, continued to make remarks about her body.

The judgment described London Underground’s RTWIs as “more thorough than most employers would adopt” particularly given C1’s relatively short absence of a week.

While Adenusi had been trained in RTWIs, the respondent did not have any policy on whether it was appropriate for male managers to conduct them for “female-specific medical conditions”.

C1 decided to make a formal complaint about Adenusi and a meeting was held on 4 August in which the allegations were made.

I find that it was wholly unsatisfactory that there was such a significant time delay in the investigation” – Judge Nicolle

In a letter from area manager Tony Young on 16 August, Adenusi was advised that no pre-judgement had been made and his suspension was merely a “precautionary measure” during the investigation.

He remained suspended on full pay for 16 months until his employment was terminated for gross misconduct on 5 December 2018. He immediately appealed, a hearing for which was held on 17 January 2019, but the decision to reject the appeal and uphold his dismissal took until 9 April 2019.

Under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 it is for the employer to show the reason for the dismissal. In his decision employment judge Nicolle said that London Underground had shown why it had dismissed the claimant, but he did not find the investigation reasonable on numerous grounds.

The Acas Code on Disciplinary and Grievance says It is important to carry out necessary investigations of potential disciplinary matters without unreasonable delay. In cases where a period of suspension with pay is considered necessary, “this period should be as brief as possible” and that meetings should be held without unreasonable delay whilst allowing the employee reasonable time to prepare their case.

Judge Nicolle said: “I find that it was wholly unsatisfactory that there was such a significant time delay in the investigation… It is wholly inappropriate that it took nearly 16 months…. I do not, however, find that the length of the delay was in itself a sufficient factor to render the claimant’s dismissal unfair.”

Other ways in which the employer did not act reasonably included: that the claimant should have had the opportunity to challenge to the evidence of C1, particularly in relation to the alleged duration of the RTWI; that all lines of enquiry were not followed, particularly in relation to key witnesses; that London Underground did not enquire about the nature of their working relationship, particular his evidence that she worked with him normally and borrowed pens and a phone charger.

In his decision, the judge said: “I find that, had the respondent undertaken an investigation within the reasonable range open to an employer, to include putting any potential inconsistencies to C1, that it would have remained more likely than not that it would still have reached the decision to dismiss the claimant.

“However, I consider that there would have been a chance that the claimant would have been given the benefit of the doubt had such further investigations been undertaken, and the evidence of C1 challenged.”

A remedy hearing at the central London employment tribunal awarded £14,478 to Adenusi based on his length of service.

Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today

Browse more human resources jobs

Rob Moss
Rob Moss

Rob Moss is a business journalist with more than 25 years' experience. He has been editor of Personnel Today since 2010. He joined the publication in 2006 as online editor of the award-winning website. Rob specialises in labour market economics, gender diversity and family-friendly working. He has hosted hundreds of webinar and podcasts. Before writing about HR and employment he ran news and feature desks on publications serving the global optical and eyewear market, the UK electrical industry, and energy markets in Asia and the Middle East.

previous post
Certification body issues warning over ‘fake’ PPE
next post
Firms struggling to buy ‘Covid-19 Secure’ equipment

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

You may also like

Top 10 HR questions September 2023: the role...

3 Oct 2023

Top 10 HR questions August 2023: Ill health...

1 Sep 2023

Police officers will be automatically dismissed for gross...

31 Aug 2023

Police chief wants control of disciplinary process

11 Aug 2023

Top 10 HR questions July 2023: Strikes and...

1 Aug 2023

BBC must exercise duty of care for Huw...

13 Jul 2023

BBC presenter allegations: privacy and duty of care

10 Jul 2023

Supreme Court dismisses appeal of officer who used...

5 Jul 2023

Law firm partner fined £45k for lewd song

10 May 2023

CBI apologises for recruiting ‘toxic’ staff

25 Apr 2023

  • BetterMe for Business: How to Build Wellness Culture at Work PROMOTED | Ever encountered a...Read more
  • Global growth with simple HR compliance (webinar) WEBINAR | In an increasingly global marketplace...Read more
  • Talent acquisition: How AI can complement a ‘back to basics’ approach PROMOTED | Artificial intelligence is now...Read more
  • What will it mean to be an HR professional in 2024? (webinar) WEBINAR | As we approach 2024...Read more
  • HR Budget Planning for 2024: Preparing your People Strategy PROMOTED | As organisations continue to adapt...Read more
  • Almost a fifth of UK workers feel undervalued – we need to solve this PROMOTED | A new report has found...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 2023

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2023 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
    • Advertise
  • 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
  • XpertHR
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Pricing
    • Free trial
    • Subscribe
    • XpertHR USA
  • Webinars
  • OHW+