An employment tribunal ruled that a mechanical engineer working for the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, who suspended himself from work while he experienced health concerns, was unfairly dismissed.
Ian Drury was employed by the executive agency of the Ministry of Defence from July 1982, until he was dismissed for gross misconduct in February 2020.
Drury was absent from work between 19 March and 1 April 2019, and between 15 April and 4 June 2019 with back pain. On 16 April, his line manager wrote a referral to occupational health regarding Drury’s absence after a telephone call, during which he advised him to remain at home on sick leave due to concern over some of his statements.
After a suggested phased return from 5 June, Drury informed his line manager that he was placing himself on leave five days later. On 23 July, he emailed to say he was off sick with depression and would not be returning to work due to ongoing issues, but did not provide a fit to work note from his GP after seven days.
His line manager sent several warnings and invited him to a meeting on 7 October, but Drury changed his mind after initially agreeing to attend, saying he would not be returning to work until it was safe to do so. On 18 October, he was suspended with effect from 21 October, pending a formal discipline decision meeting.
On 23 October, Drury provided a sick note covering his period of absence with the reason listed as stress at work. He also stated that he had been admitted to hospital with high blood pressure, and provided further sick notes valid until 15 February, noting work stress and hypertension as justification for his absences.
A gross misconduct meeting on 31 January 2020 concluded that Drury had failed to follow direct management instructions, and was absent without leave and a reasonable explanation. His employment was terminated immediately, without notice and without pay, with his last day being 6 February. Drury appealed but it was not upheld.
Employment tribunal judge Krepski found that Drury’s dismissal was a result of gross misconduct and was not based on reasonable grounds, as he was away from work and could not provide a sick note because of his mental health issues.
Krepski added: “In the course of the hearing, Drury accepted on cross examination that it is possible medication was causing him to have hallucinations. I find that it is likely that [Drury’s] mental health issues were what prevented him from having more meaningful conversations with his employer [...] and from fully realising the extent of his mental health issues.
“In the circumstances therefore, [I] do not find that [the employer] has proven, on the balance of probabilities, that [Drury] was actually guilty of the alleged gross misconduct. [The employer] was therefore in breach of contract by dismissing [Drury] without notice.”
Drury’s compensation for unfair dismissal and breach of contract will be determined at a later date.
Defence Science and Technology Laboratory was contacted for comment prior to publication.
