Leicester City Council urged the Employment Appeal Tribunal to overturn a decision that there were no reasonable grounds to dismiss an employee after he told a colleague to “bite on this”.
A previous lower tribunal ruled that the council’s investigation had wrongly discounted the claimant’s version of events. However, they did not agree what happened was simply “banter”. A council representative told the appellate tribunal that there were no conflicting accounts as the claimant did not remember what he had said to his colleague when questioned.
It was also highlighted, “There’s nothing inherently contradictory between the [woman] saying what happened and the claimant saying he couldn’t remember”. However, at the tribunal the claimant claimed that he had not said the offending phrase.
Chapman, a former employee of the council, was seen on CCTV lifting a colleague off her feet before grabbing another woman, the complainant, from behind, placing his arm around her neck and moving it toward the ground. The complainant threatened to bite chapman if he didn’t let go. She alleged that he responded, “if you want to bite anything, bite on this”.
During the council’s disciplinary investigation Chapman said he was “just having a laugh”. Chapmans counsel said, “when he described banter, he was describing a mindset”, also stating “we must be wary of applying our own standards of behaviour. What would be really extraordinary for an office environment might not be that extraordinary in another”.
Chapman was later dismissed for physically assaulting a colleague. The employment tribunal said the council had erred in deciding that the complainant’s allegation merited dismissal when it did not reach the same conclusion about Chapman lifting another colleague off her feet.
Comments