Tribunal Judge Cites Swearing’s Commonality in North While Explaining Unfair Dismissal

A tribunal judge commented that the use of the f-word was “particularly common in the North” when elaborating on why a company had unfairly terminated an employee for swearing. Rob Ogden, a delivery driver, was dismissed from his position at Booker Ltd, a wholesaler located in Oldham, after an incident where he swore at a colleague. However, Judge Jetinder Shergill determined that due to the widespread nature of swearing, Mr. Ogden, who had been employed for seven years, had been unfairly singled out. He stated that while such language should not be used in the workplace it is a “common everyday experience, particularly in the North”. Judge Shergill informed the Manchester tribunal that the disciplinary investigation itself was fair, but stressed that employers should have implemented clearer standards and norms within the workplace. Mr. Ogden was reported to have used offensive language directed at a female co-worker in July 2023. The tribunal heard that during the same incident, which involved an office discussion about doughnuts, weight loss, and attending a weight loss club, he stated: “No wonder it takes you 19 weeks to lose a stone, it hasn’t taken me 19 weeks.” The woman involved subsequently filed a complaint against Mr. Ogden. Mr. Ogden testified to the tribunal that the workplace culture was “toxic” and “lawless,” characterized by abundant “banter” and mutual horseplay among staff, which he also described as potentially “jovial.” These activities included references to colleagues’ weight, the use of the term “chubs,” conversations about “fat club,” and fake certificates left in the office commending the “gainer of the week.” The employee who complained about Mr. Ogden was said to have given “as good as she [got].” Judge Shergill concluded that there was no genuine enforcement by managers of expected standards and norms in the workplace, and that some senior staff were part of the problem. He ruled that the firm then did not follow a reasonably fair procedure before it dismissed him in October 2023. “The claimant had not been pulled up before over comments, and this likely led to a false sense of security in terms of it not being a disciplinary issue,” he said. “The free-for-all in the office suggested the claimant was the one who was without a chair when the music stopped. “There was a real sense of him being made an example of, which in the context of the free-for-all office and significant failings in process was unreasonable.” A further hearing is scheduled to determine the amount of compensation Mr. Ogden is entitled to.