Employee who hid previous dismissal for gross misconduct dismissed fairly
Mr Easton was a career civil servant who worked for the Ministry of Defence before working for the Home Office. In 2016, he was working as a Chief Immigration Ofc, and he was then dismissed for gross misconduct on 13 June 2016.
After a gap of three months, he was successful in securing new employment with the DWP on 5 September 2016. Then in May 2019, he applied for a role with the border force as an immigration officer and on the application form, he listed only years of employment and this concealed the three months after he had been dismissed for gross misconduct.
Shortly after he started employment at Manchester airport, he bumped into one of his former line managers from his earlier time at the Home Office who drew line managements attention to the fact that Mr Easton had been dismissed for gross misconduct.
A disciplinary investigation was launched in May 2020 on the basis that Mr Easton had failed to disclose in his application form that he had been dismissed by the Home Office for gross misconduct.
Ultimately, his employment was terminated on the basis that he had been dishonest in his application for the role. He brought a tribunal claim, but the tribunal held that the dismissal was fair and that it was reasonable for the employer to conclude after an investigation that Mr Easton had failed to disclose his previous dismissal.
Mr Eastern appealed but was unsuccessful. The EAT supported the tribunal decision that the employer had been entitled to conclude that any applicant for a role would fully appreciate that where there is a section for Employment History, this required a full and transparent account.
This case may well have been influenced by the fact that the type of job he was applying for would have required a number of checks and clearances, including a security clearance form. Mr Easton had also made enquiries with the employer’s HR team in 2017 and 2019 as to whether his previous dismissal would be a bar to appointment for a role at the Home Office; he was told that it would not be an automatic bar to being re-employed.
In addition, the application form had a declaration to the effect that the individual may be subject to disciplinary action if they had given false information or withheld relevant details. It is nevertheless a useful lesson that if there are gaps in an applicant’s CV, this should be explored at interview to ensure that the candidate is being open and honest with a prospective new employer. Individuals should also be prepared to explain any gaps in their employment.
