A John Lewis worker has been awarded £6,000 after his employer bungled the process for sacking him following an “unauthorised absence” during the pandemic.

Two managers at the department store’s Bluewater branch failed to sufficiently investigate the alleged misconduct of an electrical product specialist before dismissing him for missing work after a trip abroad.

His employers had claimed he purposely failed to return to work on time after he flew to Pakistan when a family member died.

An employment tribunal heard the worker - identified only as Mr S Tipu throughout - had started at John Lewis in 2011 but went on to lose his job in 2021 after a team manager thought he purposely ignored advice about quarantine rules when travelling overseas.

This ultimately meant he couldn’t return to the store when his time off had finished.

The department store had closed in November 2020 due to the second national lockdown and was due to reopen on April 12.

As a result of this, Mr Tipu worked at partner Waitrose stores, at an Ashford branch and in customer services.

However, he was told by his line manager Meral Gearing he could take time off before the shop reopened but he needed to be back in time for that.

Mr Tipu booked time off between March 22 and April 7 to visit his family after the death of a relative, as well as helping sell some of his grandfather’s land.

However, while in Pakistan the British government announced the country would be placed on the red list, causing problems for Mr Tipu to find a flight home, as well as changes to the quarantine rules.

A recently published report from the employment tribunal, heard in London earlier this year, explained: “He attempted to book a flight through PIA – Pakistan’s national airline – but was unable to do so.

“On March 29 he was able to book a flight online to travel back on April 3. But this was cancelled and refunded the next day.

“Mr Tipu also paid a travel agent for a flight on the April 3, but this was also cancelled and refunded.

“It was not until April 6 that Mr Tipu succeeded in booking a flight, which left at 1am on April 7 and arrived that afternoon.”

Upon his return, Covid restrictions meant the staff member was expected to quarantine for 10 days and he would be unable to return to work on April 8, or for the reopening of the store on April 12.

After speaking to Ms Gearing about the circumstances of his problems and delay in returning to work Mr Tipu said he thought he would be able to “test to release” – this allowed those quarantining to be released earlier by taking a Covid test.

Just over two weeks later, Ms Gearing conducted an investigation meeting to find out in further detail Mr Tipu’s reasoning for not returning to work on time.

The team manager asked whether, when Mr Tipu booked flights, he had included a quarantine period. He replied that he had wanted to use test and release, so that he would be back for the reopening. He believed this would have allowed him to return on time.

Mr Tipu’s extension of holiday was approved by the John Lewis support team due to the fact the store hadn’t been reopened yet.

Mr Tipu had not provided any mitigation for having taken unauthorised absence, despite knowing he was required to return to work on April 8

A statement from the staff member who spoke to Mr Tipu revealed they claimed to tell him he “would need to take account of the need to quarantine and that he must make sure he was back to work when the branch reopened”.

Following the investigation, a disciplinary hearing was set for May 19, 2021, and was led by disciplinary manager Sarah Kemp, who had been asked to take on the role by Ms Gearing.

During the hearing, Mr Tipu denied knowing the condition of the leave was to return by April 12 when the store reopened.

It heard Ms Gearing had sent him an email about this, but he had not read it due to a bad relationship between the pair. It was for this reason he had allegedly not engaged with some of her questions during the investigation meeting.

The employment tribunal report added: “Ms Kemp said that she had concluded that Mr Tipu had not provided any mitigation for having taken unauthorised absence, despite knowing he was required to return to work on April 8.

“She said that his concerns about Ms Gearing were not relevant to his absence. For these reasons, she said, she was terminating his contract with immediate effect.

“The summary dismissal was confirmed in a letter sent on the same day by Ms Kemp, page 240. Copies of the hearing notes were enclosed with that letter.”

The worker’s dismissal was appealed in the next few days, but after an investigation from Nigel Towse, an appeals office manager, he rejected the appeal.

In his evidence to the tribunal, Mr Towse said that a key question for him was whether Mr Tipu had been aware of the quarantine rules and the date when he needed to return to work when he first booked his holiday.

He found that he was, based on the evidence he had seen and his interviews with Ms Gearing and Ms Kemp.

Mr Tipu - who is a Muslim - had also raised concerns he thought his dismissal and problems at a previous pay review had been affected by alleged race discrimination.

Some of these issues were partly heard during his disciplinary hearing where he said he felt “needs and culture were not listened to at John Lewis”.

He gave examples of his relationship with Ms Gearing, saying she was “bullying and harassing” him. He also said his food had been thrown away by colleagues, before explaining how his mental health had been affected at the workplace and he was on antidepressants.

But the tribunal found that it could not draw any conclusions about the actions of the managers who dismissed him, and accusations his dismissal was rooted in discrimination were “not well founded”.

However, the panel agreed that Mr Tipu's previous line manager had used offensive language when they asked him what he was going to “blow up” on a trip abroad — a reference to Islamic terrorism.

In its conclusion on his claim for unfair dismissal, the employment tribunal agreed that the reason John Lewis dismissed Mr Tipu – their belief that he had deliberately absented himself from work – was a fair reason to do so.

But the Tribunal concluded that neither manager was “in a position to properly assess” Mr Tipu’s conduct.

As such, this failure was “sufficiently serious to take the investigation outside the range of reasonable responses and to render the dismissal unfair,” wrote Judge Reed.

The report said the team manager “focused primarily on the fact that Mr Tipu had failed to return on time” and that she believes he had chosen to do this and didn’t “engage with his explanation or establish details of his account”.

It added: “She did not, for example, ask him about when he originally booked his flights or about the difficulties he suggests he experienced in booking flights from Pakistan. Instead, she repeated her question, asking why the quarantine had not been included. This simply ignored the explanation that Mr Tipu had just provided.”

Following the conclusion of the hearing John Lewis said it was “disappointed” by the outcome and that it’s annual leave policy made it “absolutely clear” that - during the pandemic - employees’ time off would need to cover their travel, and any quarantine time.

It had to pay Mr Tipu £6,185.11 in total. This is made up of a basic award of £2,649.86, as well as a compensatory award of £3,535.25.

However, the award was reduced by 50% as the tribunal found there was a 50% chance he'd have been dismissed if things were done correctly.

They reduced it by a further 25% on the basis that his actions contributed to his dismissal.

A John Lewis spokesman said: “We are disappointed with this decision as we strive to be a great employer and had very clear leave policies during the pandemic to protect our partners and customers.”