Nestle worker wins Rs 27 lakh after being sacked for vaping in toilet, had caused factory shutdown

Luke Billings has been awarded £22,216.72, equivalent to roughly Rs 27.4 lakh.

A long-serving employee at a Nestlé production facility has secured compensation exceeding £22,000 (approximately Rs 27.4 lakh) after an employment tribunal determined that his dismissal following a fire alarm incident was not justified.

Luke Billings, who had been employed as a technical operator at the company’s Tutbury site in Staffordshire since 2012, lost his job after an episode in October 2023 led to a complete evacuation of the factory and disruption to operations, Daily Mail reported.

The tribunal was told that on October 11, 2023, a fire alarm was activated, requiring all personnel to leave the premises and halting work temporarily. The panel recorded: “All staff had to be evacuated. Production ceased until it was deemed safe to return. As a consequence there was disruption and lost production.”

An internal review by the company, which included examination of CCTV footage, concluded that the alarm had been triggered after Billings used an e-cigarette inside a disabled toilet. The site enforces a strict no-smoking policy.

When first questioned, Billings rejected the allegation. According to the tribunal, “The Claimant maintained his position that he was not vaping in the toilets on the day in question. He said he did not vape so it could not be him.”

During further questioning, however, he acknowledged limited use of e-cigarettes in his personal life. The panel noted that he “accepted that he did occasionally vape but only at weekends and only at home”.

Despite this, he did not concede to vaping at the workplace. The disciplinary process proceeded on the basis of both the alleged safety breach and concerns regarding his responses.

The company’s disciplinary officer ultimately decided to terminate his employment. The tribunal heard: “Firstly, he considered a breach of health and safety. Secondly, he lost trust and confidence in the Claimant because he believed he was lying. Thirdly, there was a loss of production to the business.”

It was also noted that Billings’ long tenure was taken into account, with the decision-maker concluding that he “ought to have known better”. An internal appeal against the decision was unsuccessful.

Billings subsequently brought claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination before an employment tribunal. At the time, he had recently returned to work on a phased basis after an extended period of sick leave due to depression, spanning from June 2022 to August 2023.

He argued that his condition influenced how he was treated and cited another employee as a comparator. The tribunal heard that a colleague had placed a “washbag of clothing” in an area housing a fire hose instead of using a locker. That individual admitted the risk, apologised, and received a final written warning.

Billings argued that the two situations were comparable and that the differing outcomes demonstrated inconsistent treatment linked to his mental health condition.

The tribunal rejected the discrimination claim, stating: “The less favourable treatment was not because of the Claimant’s disability but because he did not admit his culpability and/or apologise.” It added: “The reason for dismissal had nothing to do with the Claimant’s disability.”

However, the panel upheld his claim of unfair dismissal, concluding that the employer’s decision fell outside reasonable bounds.

“The decision to dismiss fell outside the range of reasonable responses open to a reasonable employer,” the tribunal said.

In its findings, the panel emphasised that the decisive factor in the dismissal was not the incident itself, but the employee’s refusal to accept responsibility. “[The disciplinary officer] made it clear in his evidence that had the Claimant accepted he had been vaping in the toilet, and apologised, he would not have been dismissed,” it noted.

The tribunal added: “In other words, health and safety and loss of production were not the principal reasons. They played a lesser part in the decision to dismiss because they were not determinative. What was determinative was the failure to accept responsibility.”

It further clarified: “Failing to apologise or to accept responsibility is not misconduct.”

The panel also described the dismissal as excessive, referring to the incident as “a single isolated act” within an otherwise “unblemished career”.

According to the outlet, Billings has been awarded £22,216.72, equivalent to roughly Rs 27.4 lakh. The sum includes a basic award along with compensation for lost earnings up to the point he was expected to resume full-time work in November 2023. It also accounts for pension losses and statutory employment rights.

However, the tribunal reduced the award by 50 per cent, stating that “the Claimant has contributed to his dismissal” and was “equally to blame” for the situation.

Nestléhas been directed to pay the compensation.