Tribunal rules in employee’s favour after salon fails to follow disciplinary procedures

News Article

An employment tribunal has ruled that a hair and beauty therapist was unfairly dismissed after her employer failed to quantify complaints about her behaviour.

The tribunal found that the employer had already made up their mind about the outcome of the investigation prior to it commencing.

Mrs Lovelady was an employee at Daniel James Hair and Beauty in Colwyn Bay from March 2016 until she was dismissed in February 2019.

The tribunal was told that work colleagues had reported Lovelady as being “offensive in her attitude” and “a bit of a bully”. It was also claimed that she engaged in inappropriate discussions with customers.

But the tribunal found that it did not believe that a “reasonably thorough and fair investigation” had been undertaken, with evidence consisting of opinion and “hearsay”.

The salon owner, Mrs Fowler, had informal conversations with Lovelady on three occasions in 2018 regarding her behaviour with colleagues and customers, but none of these amounted to a warning or a formal disciplinary hearing.

One employee reported to Mrs Fowler that Lovelady had put pressure on them to reduce working hours for her benefit after she returned from maternity leave and was not able to work additional hours because the business had lost a number of customers.

Further reports were made by employees that Lovelady was creating a “negative atmosphere”, with Fowler stating in a WhatsApp message that she was “going to tackle the problem” regarding Lovelady not being “friendly or professional”.

Fowler then met with Lovelady and gave written notice that she was suspended pending an investigation into allegations of gross misconduct. The investigation was concluded four days later, and Lovelady was invited to a meeting.

A dismissal letter was then sent to Lovelady on 19 February and her employment was terminated the following day.

The tribunal ruled that Fowler should pay £524.44 in damages to Lovelady, which was a reduced amount because Lovelady’s conduct put her at risk of a fair dismissal.

Samantha Randall, a Solicitor with Palmers, who specialises in employment law matters, said: “As this case illustrates, there is a well-defined disciplinary procedure which all employers must follow.

“A failure to follow the rules – including any suggestion that an employer may already have decided on an outcome in advance of any investigation, means that a worker may have a strong case for unfair dismissal.

“With the abolition of employment tribunal fees, it has become far easier to bring claims than in the previous five years, so employees who feel they have been unfairly dealt with, have easier access to the courts.”

For help and advice with all aspects of employment law including unfair disciplinary procedures or dismal, please contact us.


We want to protect you and our staff from the spread of coronavirus.

We would kindly request, where possible, that you contact us by telephone or email in preference to attending personally at our offices.

If you are feeling unwell or have been in contact with anyone who is unwell, please do not visit our offices.

Where possible, please send correspondence and documentation to us electronically so that we are able to progress matters remotely if necessary. Thank you for your co-operation.