TUC employees unfairly dismissed awarded PS100k


Following a flawed investigation, two unfairly dismissed TUC employees have been awarded over PS100,000. Paul Nowak, the now General Secretary, was involved in both the dismissal process and the appeal process.

In the case, a remedy judgement was published which upheld departmental secretaries Darren Lewis and Greg Lepiarz unfair termination claims made in May 2024.

Lewis is awarded PS57,460 while Lepiarz receives PS43,280. The two remedies were a basic award as well as compensation for loss of income, future earnings loss, and a compensation for the TUC not following the Acas code on discipline and grievance.

Counsel for the TUC argued to the employment tribunal that the 25% Acas increase was only appropriate if there had been a complete failure to follow Acas code. This was not the situation, and the counsel suggested the Acas raise should be 10%.

The employment judge Joffe stated: “We concluded that, given seriousness and deliberateness we found in the breaches and the absence of mitigation, a 20 percent increase was appropriate.” The code was not completely ignored, but we did find that the effects of the violations were very significant.

Liability judgment

In 2022, the pair was dismissed from the union after providing a web page to Newham Trades Council. NTC is an organisation which supports trade unionists who work or live in London Borough of Newham.

The TUC does not provide IT services to other stakeholders, such as the NTC. The website was agreed upon between Ms Dye (NTC general secretary) and the claimants who have a good relationship.

Lepiarz finished the work on his own time and away from TUC duties. A payment of PS320 had been agreed. There was confusion over whether the money had been paid. Dye also raised concerns to the TUC regarding the removal of the website and her relationship with both claimants after the money was requested.

The TUC considered emails sent by Lewis and Lepiarz to Dye as a payment demand, and not a request for the bank details in order to repay PS320. The TUC suspended the claimants, and opened a disciplinary inquiry.

Lepiarz stated that he did not remember any conversations that he may have had with Dye through his work email. He said he used his personal email because he was working on a volunteer basis.

He said he never meant to make money from the job, but only wanted to be paid to cover the costs.

Unfair dismissal

The TUC fired Lepiarz because he provided an IT service to NTC, and charged them for it; gave the false impression that this service was offered by the TUC for trades councils and used his TUC email to communicate and provide the service as a provider.

Lewis was fired for facilitating the IT services provided by Lepiarz. Paul Nowak was the TUC’s deputy general secretary at the time. He signed both dismissal letters.

The claimants appealed their dismissal. The appeal was however heard by Nowak. This was deemed inappropriate by the employment tribunal, as he sanctioned the dismissal. Both appeals failed.

The tribunal found the TUC investigation to be superficial and unfair. The tribunal also concluded that a reasonable employee would not have concluded the emails Lepiarz sent to Dye were bullying, harassment, or gross misconduct. And that Nowak wasn’t impartial enough to hear the appeals.

In its judgement of May 2024, it stated: “We concluded that Mr Nowak’s hearing the appeals was unnecessary and unfair given the availability [of the then-general secretary] baroness O’Grady. Mr Nowak had a substantive role in assessing the dismissals and approving them. He could not be considered impartial, nor would he have appeared so. The respondent was able to use other resources in the form Baroness O’Grady. This aspect of the process contributed to the unfairness of the dismissal.”

Breach of the Acas Code of Practice

The TUC was also found to have violated the Acas Code, with “significant failures and significant effects”. The judge stated: “These were failures that are unreasonable in any case, but even more so, when you consider that this employer, due to its nature, ought to have had much better knowledge of the Acas Code.”

Gerard Airey, an attorney from Kilgannon and Partners who represented the claimants in June 2024, stated: “Darren and Greg have always been staunch unionists. They were put through an awful experience. They were let down badly and unfairly dismissed from the main group that advocates for their protection.

“The findings of the TUC that they failed to properly investigate the matter and violated the Acas Code are shocking as a result. The evidence was not provided, and Mr Nowak shouldn’t have been involved both in the dismissal process and the appeal. It was alarming to hear Mr Nowak say he had reviewed the dismissal letter and allowed claimants be dismissed due to a non-existent policy. The fact that the Acas code was breached in a significant way is alarming, especially since Mr Nowak had been appointed to the Acas council back in November 2011. “I agree with the TUC that they should have known better.”

In June 2024, a TUC spokesperson stated that the union takes its responsibility as an employer very seriously. They would “review our internal processes and their application.”

Ashleigh Webber’s original article from June 2024.

Subscribe to our weekly HR news and guidance

Every Wednesday, receive the Personnel Today Direct newsletter.

Personnel Today has the latest HR job openings.


Browse Human Resources Jobs

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

💬 Contatta un nostro operatore
1
Scan the code