In the case of Mr N Smith v Abellio East Anglia Ltd T/a Greater Anglia Nick Smith was dismissed after the shunting of an out of service Greater Anglia train went wrong resulting in it crashing into buffers causing £25,000 damage.
But an employment tribunal heard radios used to communicate between workers had been faulty at the time.
Static interference meant Mr Smith did not receive a warning of how close the train was to hitting the buffers.
A second worker tasked with communicating the distance was also sacked for failing to implement an emergency stop procedure.
At the time of his dismissal in August 2022 Mr Smith had been employed for 30 years, the last 21 years as yard controller at the Norwich Crown Point Depot servicing trains.
Abellio East Anglia Ltd sacked him after concluding that he was not fully concentrating and that, knowing of the radio problems, he should have been on higher alert.
Mr Smith told the tribunal he’d only had 19 seconds to react to the situation, but during its evidence the company said it had been 30-35 seconds.
As the train was travelling at under 5mph, this was enough time to realise radio transmissions had failed and to stop the train, they added.
However, upholding his claims of unfair and wrongful dismissal, employment judge Louise Brown ruled he had not been grossly negligent.
She said: “I did not find that the claimant’s actions were anywhere near the ‘grave and weighty’ threshold or that he intentionally acted in a way to breach the respondents’ safety policies, and it would be startling if he had chosen to do so especially given the risk to his own safety and that of others on the train.”
She also ruled that him being banned from Greater Anglia premises, not given important documents and not told he could call witnesses to a disciplinary hearing had “created a highly unfair situation”.
A remedy hearing to determine compensation will be held at a later date.
This provides summary information and comment on the subject areas covered. Where employment tribunal and appellate court cases are reported, the information does not set out all of the facts, the legal arguments presented and the judgments made in every aspect of the case. Employment law is subject to constant change either by statute or by interpretation by the courts. While every care has been taken in compiling this information, we cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Specialist legal advice must be taken on any legal issues that may arise before embarking upon any formal course of action.
