A UK company's decision to sack a male employee for commenting on a female colleague's appearance in a private WhatsApp chat has been ruled unfair dismissal by an employment tribunal, exposing critical flaws in modern workplace investigations.
The case centred on a software developer, known only as Mr C, who was dismissed from his role at a tech firm after participating in a non-work-related group chat with five colleagues. The conversation, which included discussions about the team's Christmas party, took a turn when Mr C rated the appearance of a female team member.
A Flawed Investigation
The tribunal heard that the company's investigation was deeply inadequate. The female employee was never formally interviewed about the incident, nor was she asked if she felt harassed or victimised. Instead, the company relied on a second-hand account from another manager.
Employment Judge Robin Postle presiding over the case in Bristol sharply criticised the process, stating the investigation was "wholly inadequate" and that the company had "completely failed" to follow the Acas code of practice on disciplinary procedures.
The Private vs. Work Conundrum
A key element of the ruling was the private nature of the WhatsApp group. Judge Postle noted that the chat was not an official work channel but a "personal, non-work-related" space. While acknowledging the comment was "foolish and inappropriate," the judge concluded it did not warrant summary dismissal for gross misconduct.
The tribunal found that the company had overreacted and that a final written warning would have been a more proportionate response, highlighting the delicate balance employers must strike when policing employees' private communications.
A Precedent for the Digital Age
This landmark ruling sends a clear message to UK businesses about the importance of conducting thorough and fair investigations before dismissing staff for conduct on social media. It underscores that not every inappropriate comment made in a private forum constitutes gross misconduct worthy of instant dismissal.
The case is a stark reminder for HR departments to ensure their disciplinary procedures are robust, fair, and consistently applied, especially as the lines between professional and personal digital lives continue to blur.
