Brother Sacked for Refusing Weekend Shift Wins £30k in Employment Tribunal
A drainage worker has successfully sued his own brother for nearly £30,000 after an employment tribunal ruled his dismissal was both wrongful and unfair. The case, which has fractured family relations, centered on a bitter dispute over weekend working arrangements and commitments to care for ill family members.
Family Business Dispute Leads to Tribunal Hearing
Kevin Bond and his colleague Steve Haberfield were both awarded £29,639 in compensation after Employment Judge Jeremy Stuart found they had been unjustly dismissed from Bond's Utilities Services. The Bristol-based company is owned by Kevin's brother, Darren Bond, creating a particularly acrimonious family conflict.
The tribunal heard that Kevin has not spoken to his brother since the day he was fired in September 2024. The dispute began when both Kevin and Mr Haberfield refused to work specific weekend shifts, citing their need to care for ill family members. Kevin explained his partner was ill and needed him at home, while Mr Haberfield needed to support his son who was awaiting hospital admission for surgery.
WhatsApp Messages Spark Dismissal Proceedings
The situation escalated dramatically when an operations manager sent a message via a WhatsApp group chat, specifically targeting Kevin and Mr Haberfield and instructing them to work Saturday night shifts. When Kevin refused, explaining his domestic circumstances, the operations manager responded that he was "fed up" with excuses and needed him to work due to staff shortages.
Mr Haberfield initially delayed his reply as he needed to confirm his son's hospital admission schedule. Approximately 24 hours later, he received a message stating: "Steve H are you refusing to work weekends if so I will view the refusal to work procedure and you can have your weeks notice we have discussed previously you were happy to do the odd weekend so what has changed?"
After Mr Haberfield explained he had "never refused to work," the operations manager responded: "Steve there is no need to be rude. I suggest that you make it your last day tomorrow Friday 13/9/24 then you can spend quality time with your son before he goes into hospital this is all I have to say on the matter."
Employment Judge Criticises "Rude and Aggressive" Conduct
Employment Judge Jeremy Stuart, presiding over the hearing in Bristol, delivered a scathing assessment of the dismissal process. He stated: "The dismissals were carried out without any semblance of a fair procedure and were in breach of every aspect of the ACAS code. The attitude and conduct towards them was rude, aggressive and cavalier."
The judge noted that while Mr Haberfield had responded rudely at one point, the operations manager "had started it by singling them out in front of the workforce and by making an unwarranted threat of dismissal to back up his demands." Judge Stuart also highlighted Darren Bond's failure to intervene despite being given the opportunity to do so.
No Contractual Obligation for Weekend Work
A crucial finding of the tribunal was that neither employee had any contractual obligation to work weekends, meaning they could not be lawfully dismissed for refusing to do so. Judge Stuart acknowledged the company's operational need for weekend work and the frustration caused by the employees' reluctance, but stressed: "The fact that an employee refusing to work overtime caused frustration and operational problems does not equate to misconduct by the employee if the employee is under no legal obligation to work the overtime."
The judge also noted: "In any event Mr Haberfield had not refused to work the weekends in question – but merely explained that he was waiting to see if he could or not, having regard to his son's pending hospitalisation. In the case of Mr K Bond he had refused to work those particular weekends but had not said that he refused to work all weekends."
Full Compensation Awarded Due to Procedural Failures
Given the "substantively and procedurally unfair" nature of the dismissals and the complete absence of a reasonable process, no deduction was made from the compensation awarded. Judge Stuart concluded: "In any event, if the company had acted fairly, I find it highly likely that both men would still be employed by them."
Both Kevin Bond and Steve Haberfield had been employed by Bond's Utilities Services from 2010 to 2019, and again from 2021 until their dismissal. When Kevin returned to the company in 2021, he had discussed with his brother Darren the possibility of not working as many weekends, with Darren assuring him that younger employees would cover those shifts. Both men had indicated they were willing to work weekends occasionally, but the specific demands in September 2024 proved the breaking point.
