In the case of M Jones v Vale Curtains and Blinds, Jones, a part-time administrator at Vale Curtains and Blinds, was found to have been unfairly dismissed after mistakenly emailing a customer and referring to him as a “tw*t.” The tribunal determined that the dismissal was not warranted based on the circumstances surrounding the incident.
The circumstances
Meliesha Jones was employed by Vale Curtains and Blinds in Oxford from May 2021 until her dismissal in June 2023. On 14 June 2023, she received an email from a customer who had made multiple complaints about his order and was seeking a full refund. The customer had previously been somewhat confrontational, which added to Jones’s frustration. In her attempt to communicate with her colleague, installations manager Karl Gibbons, Jones meant to forward the customer’s email with a comment: “Hi Karl – Can you change this… he’s a tw*t so it doesn’t matter if you can’t.” Unfortunately, she accidentally hit “reply” instead of “forward,” sending the email directly to the customer.
Shortly after realising her error, the customer’s wife called Jones, directly confronting her about the offensive remark. Jones was understandably shocked and upset, leading her to apologise profusely during the call. Following this, she immediately informed her manager, Jacqueline Smith, of the incident. Smith expressed concern and promised to address the situation. Initially, the employer appeared to view the situation as relatively trivial, believing that no disciplinary action was warranted. However, the matter escalated when the customer’s wife demanded to speak with Smith, insisting on compensation and threatening to go to the press and social media. This pressure put the company in a difficult position and significantly influenced the subsequent actions taken against Jones. Amid this pressure, Meliesha Jones offered to pay the customer £500 out of her own pocket as a gesture of goodwill. However, the managerial team at Vale Curtains and Blinds decided to take disciplinary action against Jones, seemingly with a pre-determined outcome in mind. This approach ultimately rendered the disciplinary process a sham. They dismissed her, issuing a letter to the customer that stated she was let go “following the disgraceful email that was sent to your husband in error.”
The claims and judgement findings
Jones claimed unfair dismissal, asserting that the disciplinary process was not only flawed but also unduly influenced by the customer’s threats. Employment Judge Reindorf KC ruled in her favour, stating that the dismissal was primarily driven by the desire to appease the disgruntled customer rather than by a genuine assessment of misconduct. The judge noted that the decision to dismiss Jones came shortly after threats were made to publicise the incident, indicating that the employer prioritised customer satisfaction over fair employment practices.
The tribunal criticised the company for failing to conduct a proper investigation into the incident. There was no record of interviews conducted with Jones or any relevant witnesses. The investigation was deemed superficial, with Smith merely reviewing the email without any substantive inquiry into the broader context. Judge Reindorf highlighted that the disciplinary hearing appeared to be a mere formality, as the outcome seemed predetermined by the external pressures from the customer rather than an objective assessment of Jones’s actions. Consequently, Jones was awarded £5,484.74 in damages, which included compensation for lost earnings and statutory rights, alongside a 10% reduction for her own contributory negligence in sending the email.
Learning points for employers
This case serves as a reminder for employers about the importance of conducting a fair and thorough disciplinary process. Employers should ensure that allegations are clearly communicated, that proper investigations are carried out, including interviews with relevant parties and that the decision-makers are independent from the investigation. It is essential to balance customer feedback with fair treatment of employees, as a rushed response to reputational concerns can lead to costly legal repercussions. Following established protocols and considering all factors before making disciplinary decisions can help prevent unfair dismissal claims.
We’re here to help
For more articles like this or for regular employment law updates, sign up to our newsletter here.
Get in touch with us today by calling us on 0844 324 5840 or completing one of our contact forms.
