Jaguar Land Rover has been ordered to pay a former employee almost £148,000 for unfair dismissal and discrimination.
The award was made at a remedy hearing in July, following the Tribunal ruling that Mr Williams had been discriminated against and unfairly dismissed by Jaguar Land Rover.
The award was extensive because the Tribunal accepted Mr Williams’ evidence that he had taken steps to mitigate his losses and rejected the employer’s arguments that he should have found new employment sooner.
Mr D Williams v Jaguar Land Rover Ltd: 1306989/2020
Background
Mr Williams was employed by Jaguar Land Rover as a production operative from April 2014 to March 2020. Mr Williams was dismissed with pay in lieu of notice only and lodged claims for discrimination and unfair dismissal, which were successful at the Tribunal.
A remedy hearing was then convened to decide how much compensation should be awarded to Mr Williams, if any, and decide whether Mr Williams had taken sufficient steps to mitigate his losses (i.e. to replace the earnings lost from Jaguar Land Rover).
The Tribunal also had to establish whether Mr Williams’ employment at the company would have ended anyway, to what extent the discrimination had injured his feelings and whether he contributed to his dismissal.
Jaguar Land Rover fought for a lower payout, arguing that Mr Williams had not done enough to find new employment.
Mr Williams explained to the Tribunal that he had retrained to be a plumber and, while he was on the one-year training course, looked for manufacturing employment, seasonal work, and work as a plumber’s friend.
His evidence to the Tribunal was that his ability to work was limited to “those part-time roles which would also accommodate his child care responsibilities for his daughter and to which he could travel on local transport in the absence of a driving licence.”
Tribunal Judge, Sara Woffenden, concluded:
“We conclude that if he had not been dismissed he would have been back at work full time by 2 March 2020 and would have either been furloughed or continued working at the respondent during the pandemic.
“There is no evidence this his employment would have ended; he did not want to leave.”
Mr Williams eventually secured a full-time job on 27 March 2023 as a heating and ventilation engineer. He informed the Tribunal that he was not earning the same amount he was paid previously and it would take at least another year or so for him to get to that point.
Sara Woffenden awarded compensation totalling £147,572.75 and commented:
“In our judgement the claimant has taken reasonable steps to minimise the losses suffered as a consequence of the unlawful act of dismissal as when he was in a position to do so having regard to his personal circumstances (his previous experience in manufacturing, his inability to drive or to learn to drive, his child care responsibilities and where he lived) set against the prevailing background of the Covid pandemic.
“His move to retrain at a time when his efforts to obtain work had been unsuccessful was not unreasonable nor were the steps he took after commending training unreasonable.”
Comment
This case shows that compensation in Employment Tribunals can be extensive and whilst employers can try to show that ex-employees should have done more to mitigate their losses, ultimately if the ex-employee has a plausible and reasonable explanation for their efforts the the Tribunal is likely to accept this.
How can we help?
Laura Kearsley is a Partner in our expert Employment Law team. Laura has a strong reputation in all aspects of employment law, including Employment Tribunal litigation, discipline and grievance issues, and unfair and constructive unfair dismissal claims, and has particular experience in developing HR support services for businesses.
If you would like any advice concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please contact Laura or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us