Reasonable employer test

Case 7: The facts

James Aitken was dismissed for failing to report for duty, a clear case, under the company disciplinary rules, of gross misconduct. The company held a disciplinary hearing at which Aitken was given the opportunity to explain his conduct. Even though there had been some impelling reasons why he had missed the shift, he did not disclose them. The tribunal nevertheless held that his dismissal was unfair. The employers appealed.

The ruling

The EAT held that the dismissal was reasonable and that the employer had acted reasonably. It had emerged that Aitken had domestic difficulties which were the reason behind his misconduct but although he had tried to defend his conduct at the time of the disciplinary hearing, despite being given every opportunity to do so, he did not elaborate on the reasons for his misconduct. The EAT held that there was no further burden on the employer, acting reasonably, to further question the employee and the dismissal was therefore fair.

Weatherford UK v Aitken EATS/0049/03