PCs who had firearms authorisation withdrawn after celebrity photograph receive just under £50k in damages

PCs Steven Jones and Greg Tunnock, both firearms officers based out of Fettes, argued that they had been directly discriminated against on the ground of sex after they were transferred out of the Operational Services Division at the insistence of then Assistant Chief Constable Gary Ritchie, now retired. While it was not disputed that the decision amounted to less favourable treatment of the claimants, the respondent’s position was that this was not related to sex.

The cases were heard jointly by Employment Judge A Jones with Tribunal members J Chalmers and A Matheson. T Merck, advocate, appeared for the claimants and Gibson, solicitor, for the respondent.

Senior management concerns

On 1 March 2024, the claimants were on patrol in Edinburgh around the Scottish Parliament and surrounding streets when they received a call asking for assistance in stopping a suspicious vehicle. En route, they discovered that they were no longer needed. As they continued to drive along the Cowgate, PC Tunnock recognised the Scottish musician and radio presenter Tallia Storm on the same side of the pavement as his seat and asked her if they could take a photograph with her.

A video of the claimants’ interaction with Ms Storm was posted on TikTok and brought to the attention of their line manager, Inspector Andrew Miller. In individual meetings, he expressed the view that the matter would likely be viewed negatively by senior management and was concerned that they could view it as misogynistic. The claimants’ firearms authorisation was temporarily suspended pending review, and later ACC Ritchie took the decision to permanently withdraw their authorisation.

Both claimants were described as commended police officers who were highly regarded by their line managers. It was noted that the respondent encouraged officers to provide it with pictures which demonstrated positive public and community engagement, including previously providing staff with incentives such as pin badges for doing so, and the claimants had intended to provide the photo to the communications department. At the time that the claimants’ firearms authorisation was withdrawn, ACC Ritchie had never permanently withdrawn an officer’s firearms authorisation before, nor had he read the procedure to the followed in order to do so.

The claimants submitted that they had suffered significant impacts to their mental health as a result of the respondent’s treatment. PC Jones started taking medication, and both claimants had to undergo counselling as a result of the matter, with PC Tunnock’s wife expressing concerns that he might attempt to take his own life.

The respondent argued that female officers who acted in the same way as the claimants would have been treated the same, however in its original position it stated that female officers in the same position would not have been acting in the context of widespread criticism of the treatment of male officers by female officers in armed policing, including the 2022 Employment Tribunal decision to award £1 million in damages to PC Rhona Malone, who had been part of the same unit.

Jumped to conclusions

In its decision, the Tribunal first addressed the relevance of the claimants’ sex, saying: “The decision of GR was inextricably and impermissibly linked to the sex of the claimants. It amounted to a knee jerk reaction in response to adverse media coverage of male officers. This was related to the fact that the claimants were employed in a unit where a former female officer had been successful in a claim for sex discrimination and in respect of which GR was of the view (without evidence to support that view having been presented to the Tribunal) that a “boy’s club” mentality persisted.”

It continued: “The Tribunal accepted the evidence of the claimants and AM that senior management in the force had continued to hold that view despite the fact that the officers who had been the subject of the previous Tribunal were no longer in the unit, and that officers were regularly required to undertake equalities training, that there were still issues in the unit in relation to sexist behaviours.”

On the true motivation behind the decision, the Tribunal said: “GR wished to make an example of the claimants as male officers to demonstrate that he was taking active steps to stamp out any conduct by male officers which could be viewed as sexist in the unit even though there was nothing whatsoever sexist or misogynistic about the behaviour of the claimants. Rather, GR had jumped to conclusions because of the nature of the media coverage and comments he was referred to regarding that coverage. Having jumped to that conclusion, he then sought to establish an ex post facto justification of his decision by later suggesting that he had regard to the competencies officers required to have in the unit, which were not in his mind at all when he made the decision.”

Branded as a misogynist

Addressing the appropriate remedy, the Tribunal concluded in respect of PC Jones: “It was accepted that treatment had an impact on his personal life where he felt humiliated by having to tell his family what had happened and felt branded as a misogynist. He continues to take medication. In all of these circumstances, the Tribunal was of the view that an award in the mid Vento band was appropriate.”

Similarly, it said of PC Tunnock: “Much of what is said above in relation to PC Jones is also applicable to PC Tunnock in terms of the impact on him, his career prospects and his reputation. In addition, while on the one hand PC Tunnock missed out on a temporary promotion, he has now been given a temporary promotion. He has not taken medication, but did undergo counselling and the Tribunal accepted his evidence that events have significantly impacted his mental health and the extent to which he can trust his employer and his career progression.”

The Tribunal therefore awarded each claimant £20,000 for injury to feelings plus interest, and additional individual damages for loss of income in the sum of £2,646.59 for PC Jones and £1,670.56 for PC Tunnock.