Image for Mobile operative who exposed unsanitary work conditions is unfairly dismissed

Mobile operative who exposed unsanitary work conditions is unfairly dismissed

Published Jan 04, 2025

A recent tribunal heard the case of an employee who, after repeatedly raising concerns about working conditions, was seen as a troublemaker by his employer and was dismissed.

The case highlights how important it is for employers to follow their whistleblowing policies and take employee complaints and concerns seriously.

In the case, Mr Chiriac’s role was to transport bikes for Transport for London as part of the London Cycle Hire Scheme. He regularly worked at Waterloo station where he encountered constant problems with anti-social behaviour including public urination and drug use. Over a four-year period he repeatedly raised concerns about the unsanitary nature of working conditions to his line manager and senior managers.

In the same period multiple complaints were raised about Mr Chiriac’s conduct by the public. Investigations into the incidents did not lead to disciplinary action but found that Mr Chiriac needed conflict resolution training.

Further public complaints then followed alongside ongoing concerns being raised by Mr Chiriac about issues including understaffing and a lack of PPE. Then, when a colleague was late, Mr Chiriac made a point about it. He shouted at the co-worker and told them that his team members did not respect him. Mr Chiriac said that if colleagues did not follow him “there would be problems.” He was subsequently given a final written warning for his misconduct.

Matters came to a head when Mr Chiriac’s team leader instructed him to push two bikes at a time but he refused to do so and made comments to his colleagues that further undermined his team leader. Mr Chiriac was then dismissed for the further instance of misconduct including bullying.

At tribunal Mr Chiriac claimed he was “targeted because he caused a lot of issues to management”.

The tribunal found that the main reason he was dismissed was the “unwelcome” public interest disclosures he had made which meant his managers saw him as a “troublemaker”.

The tribunal found that the conflicts with the public and colleagues were caused by frustrations over the unsatisfactory working conditions and a “lack of change in relation to them following years of complaints.”

The tribunal found that the employer’s actions were unfair and showed an “agenda” against Chiriac. It noted Mr Chiriac’s lack of interpersonal skills but did not blame him for how he conducted himself.

The tribunal found Mr Chiriac believed it was in the public interest to disclose the information about the working conditions as he was “concerned not only for himself but also for his colleagues.”

Learning for employers

  • The case emphasises the need to follow whistleblowing policies.

  • Employers need to ensure that both line managers and senior managers have been trained on how to respond to whistleblowing concerns.

  • Managers need to check when a concern is raised whether it could be a “protected disclosure” and if so they need to respond and investigate the matter.

  • Employees need to be trained on how to raise a concern about health and safety concerns and what would amount to a “protected disclosure.”

  • Ensure employees have either been provided with a copy of the Whistleblowing Policy or know where to access a copy.

  • Employers must act on concerns however they are raised and recorded by an employee. The disclosure could be raised in a report, document, email, letter, minutes of a meeting etc.

  • Ensure employees are aware that if they raise genuine concerns about wrongdoing in the workplace they will not be subjected to unfair treatment.

  • Address all whistleblowing complaints with fairness and transparency. Investigate the concerns objectively and report back to the employee on the findings. This will help employees to feel protected when raising issues.

  • Ensure that any potential disciplinary proceedings against an individual have not been triggered by concerns raised by that employee.