Employee fired for photocopying rota awarded £15,000

Employee fired for photocopying rota awarded £15,000

An employee fired for photocopying a staff rota has been given over £15,000 at an employment tribunal.

Mark Knowles was sacked for gross misconduct after managers at Eildon House in Edinburgh suspected him of giving the copies to a care watchdog.

He said he made the copy so he would know his shifts but bosses thought he had breached a confidentiality agreement by replicating the “data protected information”.

Mr Knowles said he was shocked that managers decided to fire him.

He said: “It was in an open book in the staff room, which was open all day and night.

“Other staff were permitted for many years to make photocopies or use their mobile phones to take pictures of the rota.

“At the end of that week, I ripped up the copy and put it in the bin. I never handed the rota or any confidential information over to anyone.”

He added: “They had no evidence on this whatsoever but they still sacked me.

“When I went to the disciplinary hearing, my union rep told me the worst I could expect was a verbal warning because the rota wasn’t marked as confidential so when they dismissed I was very surprised.”

During his disciplinary hearing, the operations director, Ian McMaster related the “breach” to previous complaints regarding staffing levels and improperly administered medication, despite Mr Knowles having nothing to do with these.

Judge Reginald Christie said the decision was “tainted by what can only have been a suspicion”.

In a written judgment he stated: “All staff at Eildon House possess the information shown on the weekly rotas. That much is obvious and at no point was it suggested that Mr Knowles had become possessed of information he was not already entitled to have. However, what was suggested by Eildon Care was something of which they had no evidence or knowledge i.e. that that information had in fact been transmitted by the claimant to someone else.”

Eildon Care also failed to give Mr Knowles a proper appeal. Mr Christie said “no reasonable employer” would have made the decisions the company did in this case.

Share icon
Share this article: