So what was the actual reason used for dismissal, what did they think was so bad that it justified dismissal?
If an employee has been continuously employed with their employer for at least 2 years they will be protected against unfair dismissal. This means that to fairly dismiss them their employer has to show that there was a potentially fair reason for dismissal and that a fair dismissal procedure was followed.
According to the Employment Rights Act 1996 there are five separate reasons that an employer could use to show that a dismissal was fair: conduct, capability, redundancy, illegality or some other substantial reason (SOSR). The employer will not only need to show that the dismissal was for one of those reasons, but also justify that it was appropriate and reasonable to use in the circumstances. In addition, they need to ensure that a fair dismissal procedure was followed and this would depend on which of the above reasons they used to dismiss.
Undermining the employer’s authority, could in some serious cases amount to gross misconduct which can lead to dismissal but it has to be something rather serious. For example refusing to follow reasonable instructions or unreasonably challenging a decision made by the employer, however it needs to be serious as mentioned – not just discussing options to deal with a proposed change to your working conditions.
So based on the information I have it does appear a rather harsh decision in the circumstances and you can appeal with the employer first before considering whether to make a claim for unfair dismissal in the employment tribunal.
Please let me know if this has answered your original question or if you need me to clarify anything else for you in relation to this? Thanks
Hello, I see you have accessed and read my answer to your query. Please let me know if this has answered your original question or if you need me to clarify anything else for you in relation to this? I just need to know whether to close the question or not? Thanks