The claimant worked as a Family Support Worker for respondent's care company, providing services to vulnerable families. She claimed to have made two protected disclosures regarding a colleague’s alleged drug use and "chaotic" lifestyle. The first disclosure was made in August 2022 to her deputy manager, and the second in September 2022 to an independent visitor, AC, who was responsible for reporting safeguarding concerns to the respondent and OFSTED.
The claimant's employment was terminated on the same day as her meeting with AC. She was dismissed without notice after being called into a meeting that she was not told would be a disciplinary hearing and not given an opportunity to answer the allegations made against her.
The respondent cited reasons such as incorrect medication recording, leaving the premises without authorisation, and failing to follow guidance. However, the claimant argued that the real reason for her dismissal was her whistleblowing.
A majority in the employment tribunal found in the claimant's favour, determining that she had a reasonable belief her disclosures highlighted risks to health or safety, and that her dismissal was directly linked to these protected disclosures, rather than the reasons given by the respondent. The respondent appealed.
The EAT dismissed the appeal, rejecting arguments that the tribunal’s conclusions were perverse or inadequately reasoned. It found that the tribunal had conducted a careful analysis...
Panaji: The Public Works Department (PWD), Government of Goa, has strongly refuted allegations being circulated on social media and certain media platforms regarding a so-called "Rs 1,000 crore sc...