Be consistent unless conduct is different
The recent EAT decision in MBNA Limited v Jones highlights the importance of consistency of treatment when dealing with disciplinaries, unless the conduct concerned is distinguishable and therefore a different sanction justifiable. In the case the EAT agreed that the different conduct of two employees at a company social event, one who deliberately punched the other employee in the face, the other of whom made threats to his colleague which were not carried out, ultimately justified the different disciplinary sanctions applied of dismissal and a final written warning respectively.
SUMMARY
UNFAIR DISMISSAL - Reasonableness of dismissal
The Employment Judge found the Claimant’s dismissal to be unfair
only by reason of disparity with the sanction imposed on another employee who
received a final written warning. However the Employment Judge did not apply
the guidance in Hadjioannou v Coral Casinos Ltd [1981] IRLR 352;
if he had done so he would have been bound to recognise key differences between
the two cases. His reasoning on the question of disparity did not properly
apply section 98(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. Finding of
unfair dismissal substituted.”
