Experts say outcome shows tribunals will be ‘pragmatic’ as judge decides employer had introduced sufficient measures to avoid Covid-related risks

An employee who refused to return to work due to Covid concerns was fairly dismissed, an employment appeal tribunal (EAT) has ruled, in one of its first considerations of a Covid-related dismissal.

The London EAT heard that Mr D Rodgers was self isolating at the start of the pandemic and told his employer, Leeds Laser Cutting, that he would not be coming back to work until lockdown eased. He was subsequently dismissed.

While Judge James Tayler noted that he understood Rodgers had genuine concerns about the pandemic and the safety of his children, this did not mean that he had a genuine belief that there were serious and imminent circumstances of danger that prevented him from returning to work.

How employers can best defend tribunal claims post-Covid

The latest Covid-related case law

The ruling also noted that Leeds Laser Cutting had taken steps to avert the danger of infection in its workplace and Rodgers “could reasonably have taken steps to avoid the dangers” during the pandemic by following those measures.

Yvonne Gallagher, partner at Harbottle & Lewis, said the outcome was a clear indicator that tribunals are taking a “pragmatic approach” to issues around Covid concerns.

“The mere assertion of a belief of danger by an employee will not be sufficient to create liability on the part of an employer that has taken reasonable...

Read Full Story: https://www.peoplemanagement.co.uk/article/1755457/employee-fairly-dismissed-...