Hostel caretaker, Vincent Murphy, booze sacking upheld
Tribunal dismisses protests from man who went to work after drinking two pints of beer
Published: 15 July, 2010
by JOSIE HINTON
A CARETAKER of a hostel for the homeless who was sacked for drinking two pints of beer before work has had his case thrown out by an employment tribunal.
Vincent Murphy, who worked as a concierge at the Levine and Abbotts Hostel for homeless families, in Broadhurst Gardens, West Hampstead, was dismissed without warning after he admitted to bosses he had stopped off at the pub before starting work at 5pm on October 21 last year.
The 62-year-old, of nearby Hillfield Road, brought a case for unfair dismissal against his employer Broadland Guarding Services Ltd – claiming he was led to believe his bosses had no problem with him drinking before his shift.
But a tribunal threw out his case on Monday, concluding the security company – which is contracted to run the hostel for Camden Council – was within its rights to dismiss Mr Murphy for being under the influence of alcohol while at work.
During a one-day hearing on Monday, the tribunal panel was told Mr Murphy, who was responsible for monitoring CCTV and acting as a security presence, was “well-liked” by his employers and had a previously untarnished record when he was dismissed for gross misconduct after arriving at work smelling of alcohol.
He appealed against the decision but his employers upheld his sacking following a seven-minute hearing.
But Mr Murphy told the tribunal his managers knew he had consumed alcohol before work on previous occasions and each time he was allowed to continue his shift.
He said he was never formally warned not to drink before work and continued to receive good appraisals, which described him as “very reliable” and noted he “gives 100 per cent on site,” the tribunal heard.
Mr Murphy also said he found the company’s alcohol policy confusing, arguing the phrase “under the influence” was open to interpretation.
“I was led to believe drinking a couple of pints in my own time before my shift was acceptable to my employer,” said Mr Murphy. “I worked night shifts so the only time I could drink alcohol was in my own time during the day. If I had known what action would follow I would not have drunk in my own time.”
Robb Eldridge, area manager for Broadland Guarding Services Ltd, admitted it was “regrettable” that Mr Murphy had not been formally warned, but maintained turning up to work after drinking alcohol was completely unacceptable and constituted gross misconduct.
He told the tribunal: “Are there lessons to be learned? Yes. We definitely need to look at some policy procedures, that’s a fact. But the over-riding thing is that he admitted to drinking before duty.
“For a large part of his shift the claimant is the sole person there to offer to residents when problems arise. It is essential that he is alert and has his wits about him at all times. I do not accept that an individual is able to properly perform these duties after two pints of beer.”
Chairing the panel at Watford employment tribunal, Judge Michael Southam said Broadland had acted within the “range of reasonable responses” when sacking Mr Murphy, and dismissed his claim.
Judge Southam added: “The matter that caused the greatest concern was that the claimant had been spoken to about drinking before work before, but had not been warned. That caused us quite a bit of concern but we took into account his terms of employment. It is something that the respondent needs to take into account in our view.”
Speaking after the hearing, Mr Murphy said he had since tried to find work but had found it difficult due to his age and the fact he was dismissed.