Dundee manager fired over £21,360 pothole repairs wins £34,326 compensation

NewsWorld NewsUK NewsA Dundee transport manager with 24 years at his company was fired after it questioned about £21,000 in pothole repair bills he had been told to arrange; a tribunal has ruled it unfair and awarded him £34,326 A Dundee transport manager with 24 years at his company was fired after it questioned about £21,000 in pothole repair bills he had been told to arrange; a tribunal has ruled it unfair and awarded him £34,326 Management questioned the amount paid to HB Roadways for the repairs (Representational photo) A Dundee transport manager who was dismissed after his company questioned more than £21,000 spent on pothole repairs has won £34,326 in compensation.

An employment tribunal ruled that Joinery and Timber Creations Ltd (JTC) had treated him unfairly and failed to conduct a proper investigation before firing him.According to STV News, S Shaw had worked for the furniture company for more than 24 years and had risen to the position of transport manager.

The dispute began in 2024, when he was asked to arrange repairs to potholes in the company's factory yard in Dundee.The factory manager, Mr Freeman, had instructed Shaw to contact HB Roadways, a contractor with which JTC had a long-standing relationship.

Shaw was not asked to obtain competing quotes or check the prices before arranging the work. The company's health and safety manager had previously dealt with the contractor but had since left.The issue came up during an accounts meeting in December 2024.

Management questioned the amount paid to HB Roadways for the repairs and ordered an investigation. The invoices for October and November 2024 were worth £10,710 and £10,650, taking the total to £21,360.Shaw was suspended, while his line manager, Ms Patterson, investigated the matter.

He was told that the company was concerned about an excessive charge for the work and whether the spending amounted to an “inappropriate use of company funds”.Investigation found no wrongdoing Ms Patterson spoke to several employees as part of her investigation.

She eventually concluded that Shaw had not done anything wrong. Instead, she identified “deficiencies in authorisation procedures” within the company.However, she was later removed from the investigation and did not prepare the final report.

Other employees put the report together.Shaw was not told about Patterson's conclusion when he attended a disciplinary hearing with company director Mr Mulholland in January 2025. During the meeting, several allegations were raised against him.

These included claims that he had denied having previous contact with HB Roadways and had deleted messages exchanged with the contractor.The tribunal heard that Shaw became extremely upset during the meeting. He told Mulholland not to come closer to him or he would “knock his block off”, or words to that effect.The judge noted that Shaw had recently experienced a family bereavement.

January 22 was also the anniversary of his mother's death. He was emotional during the meeting and felt that the company was treating him badly despite his 24 years of service. JTC subsequently dismissed him. His attempts to appeal the decision were unsuccessful.Tribunal questions company Judge Jones found serious problems with the way JTC had handled the investigation and disciplinary process.

The tribunal accepted Patterson's conclusion that the company's own authorisation procedures were inadequate.It also criticised the involvement of HR manager Ms Shand in several stages of the case, including Shaw's suspension, investigation, disciplinary hearing and appeal.

The tribunal described her as a “guiding hand” in the process.The company director was also unaware that the report placed before him had not been written by Patterson, who had conducted the investigation. He believed she had prepared it and did not know that her actual finding was that Shaw had done nothing wrong.As a result, Mulholland entered the disciplinary hearing without information that could have supported Shaw's case.

The tribunal also described the appeal hearing as “no more than a tick box exercise”.In its ruling, the tribunal said the company had decided early on that too much money had been spent with HB Roadways and that someone had to be held responsible.It said, “A narrative was created that it must have been the claimant, and after LP had indicated that she did not believe that the claimant had done anything wrong, the respondent sought to interpret any evidence it had before it in such a way as to prove the claimant’s guilt rather than consider that evidence with an open mind.”The tribunal concluded that the decision to dismiss Shaw was “both substantively and procedurally unfair”.Company ordered to pay £34,326 JTC argued that Shaw's compensation should be reduced because he would have been dismissed even if the company had followed a fair process.

The tribunal rejected this argument, saying there was no evidence of misconduct or wrongdoing. It found that a proper investigation would likely have cleared him.The company also argued that Shaw's own conduct had contributed to his dismissal.

However, the tribunal rejected this claim, finding that he had followed the procedures established by JTC.The tribunal ordered the company to pay him £14,350 in compensation, £500 for the loss of statutory rights and a further £19,476 as a compensatory award.

The total payout was £34,326. You use AI every day. Now get your AI Quotient. Take the AIQ test. At TOI World Desk, our dedicated team of seasoned journalists and passionate writers tirelessly sifts through the vast tapestry of global events to bring you the latest news and diverse perspectives round the clock.

With an unwavering commitment to accuracy, depth, and timeliness, we strive to keep you informed about the ever-evolving world, delivering a nuanced understanding of international affairs to our readers. Join us on a journey across continents as we...