Even when an employer feels that a dismissal is fair, an employee could still claim unfair dismissal if the reason given for it was not the real reason, the employer did not follow a fair procedure, or the matter does not fall under gross misconduct. If employers get it wrong, they could face substantial damages claim for unfair dismissal.
As such, any employer facing a dismissal situation must seek HR advice and guidance, as highlighted in the case of Szabolcs Fekete v Citibank NA 2023.
Szabolcs Fekete v Citibank NA 2023 – The Background
Szabolcs Fekete (SF) started working as a Senior Analyst for Citibank on 15 July 2015. On 3 July 2022, he travelled to Amsterdam on business, having informed his work colleague prior to taking the trip that he was going to take his partner with him. SF returned on 5 July 2022 and made expenses claim shortly thereafter. The claim was rejected as the approver believed the expenses claim was for meals for two people, and thus needed to be named in the system.
Citibank had an expenses policy stating that “spousal travel and meals are not reimbursable.” On top of this, their disciplinary policy stated that “falsification or irregular practice involving cash, vouchers, records, use of business credit, corporate debit cards for non-business related expenses, and returns of accounts – including false claims for expense reimbursement,” all amounted to gross misconduct.
Furthermore, Citibank also had a conduct policy in place that informed employees “not to make false statements to internal or external auditors, investigators, legal counsel, or Citi representatives.”
Szabolcs Fekete v Citibank NA 2023 – The Response
SF responded that he was on the business trip by himself, claiming to have bought 2 coffees as they were very small. Citibank queried that the receipt presented appeared to indicate he had bought 2 sandwiches, 2 coffees, and another drink. SF responded agreeing to this, but further explained that he had skipped breakfast that day and only had a coffee. At lunch, he had one sandwich with a drink, and took another coffee back to the office with him along with a second sandwich for dinner later in the afternoon.
SF stated the amounts were well within his €100 expenses limit, and queried why his eating habits were under scrutiny to such an extent.
Unconvinced by his explanation, the matter was investigated further, leading to a disciplinary hearing for gross misconduct. In the course of the process, SF admitted he had shared meals with his partner who was travelling with him, but was not an employee of Citibank. As such, he misled his employer on matters relating to expenses, and – based upon Citibank’s policies, SF was dismissed. In response to this, SF made a claim to the Employment Tribunal (ET) for unfair dismissal.
What Did the Employment Tribunal Decide?
On the facts, the ET decided that Citibank’s decision to dismiss SF was a reasonable response from a reasonable employer. Judge Illing highlighted: “I am satisfied that even if the expense had been filed under a misunderstanding, there was an obligation on the claimant to own up and rectify this at the first opportunity. I accept the respondent requires a commitment to honesty from its employees.”
What Does this Mean for Employers?
This case reminds employers to have robust policies in place to ensure that employees in positions of trust and responsibility are aware of such policies, and – if breached, understand what the potential repercussions could be.
If you require any further guidance and assistance on the matter, please do not hesitate to contact the Quest Advice Line on 01455 852 028.
