Being fired is rarely a pleasant experience, but being dismissed via WhatsApp, without warning or due process takes it to another level. In Mr Adam Gajdosy v Big Issue Sharebike Ltd (In Liquidation), the Employment Tribunal found that Mr Gajdosy, a mechanic with chronic back pain, had been unfairly dismissed after raising concerns about his unsuitable working conditions. The dismissal came without any prior warning or any formal procedure and was only later confirmed in writing. The Tribunal awarded Mr Gajdosy over £40,000, sending a clear message about the importance of following a fair procedure and the financial risks of failing to do so.
Background
Mr Gajdosy started his employment with Sharebike as an E-bike Technician on 7 November 2022. He had applied for this role as he was unable to continue his previous role as a Delivery Driver due to the prolonged periods of sitting which caused him back pain and reduced his mobility.
During his interview with Sharebike, Mr Gajdosy disclosed his disability and was informed by a Director and Manager at Sharebike that appropriate adjustments would be made. These adjustments included a worktable, a stool and a ramp. Once Mr Gajdosy started working for Sharebike, he frequently asked the same Director and Manager when he would be provided with these adjustments in order to avoid heavy lifting and straining his back, but these were never provided to him.
In December 2023, Mr Gajdosy was told that Sharebike had insufficient funds to purchase the equipment he had been promised. He was advised to use the IKEA kitchen cabinet at his workplace as a temporary measure. Over months of continuing to obtain the necessary adjustments, Mr Gajdosy resorted to using a children's chair he'd borrowed from his sister. As a consequence, Mr Gajdosy was unable to complete his work as efficiently as he hoped. He had difficulties lifting, bending and exerting force. This also led to greater fatigue at the end of his working day and an adverse effect on his mental well-being.
Dismissal via WhatsApp
In addition to raising concerns about his workplace set up, Mr Gajdosy also expressed concerns on a number of occasions that his working environment was "intolerably cold". He also raised concerns about the safety of Sharebike's Food Transit van, its maintenance, state of repair and whether it was being driven legally, properly taxed and insured. These concerns were raised with Mr Endresen, the CEO and Director of Sharebike, along with two Managers.
Despite emailing his concerns on 19 February 2023, his employer did not respond until 15 March. Instead of addressing Mr Gajdosy's concerns, he received a WhatsApp message on the same day to inform him that he had been dismissed. This dismissal came without any prior warning and no formal procedure was followed. The dismissal was later confirmed to Mr Gajdosy in writing.
Mr Endresen explained that the reason for Mr Gajdosy's dismissal was that he did not fit into Sharebike's environment, which required "fast repairs, high team support and good communication across the organisation." Mr Endresen also explained that many mechanics find it very hard to work with him.
However, fundamentally none of these issues had previously been raised with Mr Gajdosy directly, and he was therefore not put on notice of any of the concerns against him.
On 21 August 2023, Mr Gajdosy lodged a claim in the Employment Tribunal.
Decision
The Tribunal found that Sharebike's reasons for dismissal were without foundation and that the real reason for dismissal was because he had made various protected disclosures regarding the working environment's temperatures and the safety of a work van. Accordingly, the Tribunal determined that Mr Gajdosy was automatically unfairly dismissed.
The Tribunal also upheld the claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments. The Tribunal determined that Sharebike had recognised the requirement to provide Mr Gajdosy with a ramp and other lifting equipment but failed to make this reasonable adjustment for him.
Mr Gajdosy was awarded £40,645 in compensation, holiday pay and unpaid wages.
Lessons for employers
In this case, the dismissal was found to be automatically unfair because it occurred in the context of protected disclosures made by the Claimant. However, an employer must always ensure that in addition to having a valid reason for dismissal, such as capability or redundancy, it is equally important to follow a fair process. A fair process typically includes:
- Conducting a thorough investigation: Employers should gather all relevant facts and evidence before making any decisions. This may involve interviewing witnesses, reviewing documentation, and giving the employee an opportunity to respond to any allegations.
- Following internal procedures: Employers should adhere to their own disciplinary or grievance procedures, which should be clearly outlined in the employee handbook or contract. Deviating from these procedures without justification can undermine the fairness of the process.
- Providing clear communication: The employee should be informed in writing that their conduct or performance is under review and that dismissal is being considered. They should be given sufficient notice of any meetings.
- Allowing the employee to respond: A fair process requires that the employee be given an opportunity to present their side of the story and respond to the evidence against them.
Ultimately, employers must ensure that any dismissal is not only substantively justified but also procedurally fair, and where there is the possibility of a discrimination or protected disclosure dismissal claim, efforts need to be made to show the genuine reason for the dismissal. Failure to do so can result in claims of unfair dismissal.
How we can help
For further information, or to discuss the issues raised within this case, please contact us to speak to a member of our Employment Team.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
