28/11/2023
£147K pay out for Unfair Dismissal at Jaguar Factory
Jaguar and Land Rover Limited have been ordered to pay over £147,000 in a recent discrimination tribunal case. The focus of the case was Mr. Williams, who, before his dismissal, had been grappling with anxiety and depression, prompting him to take a leave of absence for recovery. Despite attending cognitive behavioural therapy and an improvement in his condition, Mr Williams was dismissed in March 2020, shortly before the first lockdown.
However, Mr William’s mental health condition is a protected characteristic under the 2010 Equality Act on account of disability. Unfavourable treatment on the grounds of any protected condition is illegal. Taking his claim to the employment tribunal in Midlands West, Mr Williams argued he had faced discrimination on these grounds and the tribunal agreed with his claim.
Considering what would have happened if there had been no discrimination, Jaguar argued that Mr Williams would have been dismissed soon anyway, pointing to his two non-mental health related absences. This argument can be used to reduce the compensation for future losses, if the employee could have been dismissed in a legal way. However, the two absences were not considered substantial enough to warrant dismissal and this argument was subsequently rejected by the tribunal.
Jaguar also argued that Mr Williams had not searched hard enough for work following his dismissal. Under the law, claimants are expected to take reasonable steps to reduce losses - in this case searching for new employment. Jaguar pointed out that Mr Williams had not searched for work in the months following his dismissal, nor had he applied for some local jobs such as the HS2 development in the area. However, Mr Williams pointed to his retraining as a plumber to get new employment and his search for other jobs in the area. The tribunal found that Mr Williams had taken reasonable steps to mitigate his losses and find alternative employment.
The large sum of compensation was calculated by considering the losses incurred by Mr Williams. Compensation should aim to do ‘as best as money can do to put the applicant in the position he or she would have been in but for the unlawful conduct’. In this case, Mr Williams had struggled to find appropriate employment until finishing his retraining as a plumber earlier this year. Additionally, £10 000 was awarded for injury to feelings, giving the six-figure sum.
The case serves as a reminder of the importance of considering discrimination legislation. Unfavourable treatment for any protected trait is illegal with unlimited fines applying - in this case costing the employer a staggering £147K.
For advice on the legal routes of dismissal and adherence to discrimination legislation, contact HR First.
