The tribunal found the employer had reasonable grounds to treat the conduct as misconduct.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has dismissed an appeal by Damien Burke, upholding the finding that his dismissal by The Harrow Club was fair after a safeguarding incident involving two young people. The appeal concerned whether giving a young person assistance after an injury amounted to first aid.
Burke had worked as a youth worker at The Harrow Club’s Old Oak youth club in West London for at least 13 years. On 10 July 2023, two young people became involved in an altercation. Burke intervened during two stages of the incident, but did not see a later fight away from the club.
One of the young people, referred to in the judgment as A, subsequently returned to the club with blood around his mouth and a missing tooth. Burke knew that A had lost the tooth and gave him tissue to wipe away the blood. He also went outside with A to look for the missing tooth. A qualified first aider, Jay, was also present.
The club’s Serious Youth Violence Incident Procedure required staff to attend to young people and administer first aid if trained, report incidents that evening and contact the police. Burke was later disciplined for failing to follow the reporting procedure, administering first aid without training or permission, and providing an incomplete initial account of what had happened. He was dismissed without notice in March 2024.
The Employment Tribunal rejected Burke’s unfair dismissal claim. It found that the employer had a genuine belief that he had committed the misconduct, reasonable grounds for that belief, and no identified procedural failing. It also concluded that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses available to an employer, given the safeguarding issues involved.
The EAT considered the legal approach to identifying the reason for dismissal under section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It stressed that tribunals must establish the actual factual reason for dismissal — or the principal reason where there is more than one — before assessing whether that reason falls within a potentially fair category such as conduct. Where several matters form a composite reason, the tribunal must consider the totality of that reason when assessing fairness.
On the specific appeal point, the EAT held that the Employment Tribunal was entitled to conclude that Burke had given first aid. Although simply handing over tissue might, in isolation, fall short of first aid, the tribunal had considered the wider circumstances, including Burke’s knowledge that A had lost a tooth and the presence of an authorised first aider.
The EAT concluded that there was no error of law in the Employment Tribunal’s decision and dismissed the appeal.