EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Compensation
Polkey deduction
A Tribunal found that an employee who had left site an hour and a half or so early on two consecutive days and subsequently had submitted time sheets claiming to have worked full days was unfairly dismissed because there was no proper investigation. It thought the employee guilty of significant contributory fault, but because it assessed the ‘Polkey’ chances of a fair dismissal at 50% it moderated the further deduction for contributory fault to 10% only. It applied this both to the basic and compensatory awards. Held it was wrong to apply the moderated figure to the basic award, since ‘Polkey’ would have no effect on that. Secondly, the Tribunal had approached its assessment of the ‘Polkey’ deduction by asking the chances of a reasonable employer dismissing an employee in such circumstances. That was the wrong approach. Though the postulated dismissal must be a fair one, it is the chances of the actual employer in the case, not some hypothetical reasonable employer, dismissing this employee which has to be assessed. The case was remitted to the same Tribunal for further consideration.
Langstaff P J
[2013] UKEAT 0327 – 12 – 1401
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Polkey v A E Dayton Services Limited CA 1986
The employee had been made redundant with no attempt at consultation and in breach of procedures.
Held: His claim of unfair dismissal was dismissed because even if the procedures had been followed, the result would have been the same. What . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Damages
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.471350