In a ruling that highlights the fine line between workplace banter and perceived misconduct, an employment tribunal has found in favour of a warehouse worker who was sacked for allegedly impersonating music legend Michael Jackson.
Mr Carl O'Brien, a 48-year-old operative from Wigan, was dismissed from his role at logistics firm ARRIVAL UK Ltd after a colleague accused him of making persistent 'hee-hee' noises and striking Jackson-esque dance poses in the workplace. The company alleged this behaviour constituted harassment and unprofessional conduct.
The Unusual Allegations
According to tribunal documents, the complainant—a fellow warehouse employee—stated that Mr O'Brien's impersonations made them feel "uncomfortable" and "targeted." The specific allegations included:
- Repeatedly making the distinctive Michael Jackson 'hee-hee' vocal sound
- Occasionally performing the iconic moonwalk in warehouse aisles
- Adjusting his work glove in a manner reminiscent of the singer's single sequined glove
Mr O'Brien vehemently denied the accusations, stating that while he was indeed a fan of the late pop star, he had never engaged in sustained impersonations at work.
Tribunal's Groundbreaking Decision
Employment Judge Robin Steen, presiding over the case in Manchester, delivered a scathing assessment of the employer's investigation. The tribunal found that ARRIVAL UK Ltd had failed to conduct a reasonable investigation and had unfairly dismissed Mr O'Brien based on insufficient evidence.
"While employers have every right to address genuine harassment," Judge Steen noted in the written judgment, "they must ensure allegations are properly investigated and substantiated. In this case, the investigation fell significantly short of reasonable standards."
The tribunal heard that no other employees corroborated the allegations, and security footage from the warehouse showed no evidence of the alleged behaviour.
Broader Implications for Workplace Culture
This unusual case raises important questions about what constitutes harassment in modern workplaces and the importance of thorough investigations before disciplinary action. Employment experts suggest the ruling serves as a cautionary tale for employers navigating interpersonal conflicts among staff.
The tribunal awarded Mr O'Brien compensation for unfair dismissal, with the exact amount to be determined at a subsequent hearing. The case has concluded with a clear message about the necessity of proper procedures in workplace disputes, no matter how unusual the allegations might seem.
