- UK tribunal orders Nestle to pay £22,000 to worker unfairly dismissed for vaping
- Luke Billings was sacked after alleged vaping caused factory evacuation and production halt
- Tribunal found dismissal unfair due to isolated incident and lack of clear gross misconduct rule
A UK employment tribunal has ordered Nestle to pay £22,000 (approximately Rs 27,35,000) to a worker who was sacked for allegedly vaping in a factory toilet, triggering a full evacuation and production halt, BBC reported. The employee named Luke Billings was a technical operator at the Swiss food company's facility in Tutbury, Staffordshire. After working at the factory for over a decade, he was dismissed for alleged gross misconduct in October 2023.
"All staff had to be evacuated. Production ceased until it was deemed safe to return. As a consequence, there was disruption and lost production," the panel was told.
Nestle's investigation, including CCTV review, concluded that Billings had been vaping in a disabled toilet, a strictly prohibited act. As per reports, Nestle's disciplinary officer "lost trust and confidence [in Billings] because he believed he was lying".
Also read | After Years Of Loyalty, 3% Hike Pushes Woman Earning Rs 50 Lakh To Quit, Internet Reacts
Billings denied the allegations. Initially, he said that he doesn't vape, so it couldn't have been him. However, later he admitted he only vapes "occasionally" and at home.
The tribunal ruled that while Nestle had reasonable grounds to suspect Billings, the decision to dismiss him was unfair. "This was a single isolated act in an otherwise unblemished career," the tribunal found.
The panel noted that Billings' failure to apologise wasn't sufficient grounds for dismissal, especially since there was no clear rule stating vaping in toilets constituted gross misconduct.
Also read | Punch The Viral Baby Monkey In Japan Bonds With "Girlfriend", Internet Reacts
Despite ruling he was unfairly fired, the panel halved his compensation as he was "equally to blame" for being dismissed.
Billings had been on sick leave for depression and argued he was treated unfairly due to his condition. However, the tribunal rejected his disability discrimination claim, stating the dismissal was due to his failure to admit culpability and apologise.
"The reason for dismissal had nothing to do with the Claimant's disability," the panel stated.
"...but because he did not admit his culpability and/or apologise," it added.
The company hasn't reacted to the verdict so far.
