Was a bus driver’s dismissal within the range of reasonable responses? 

A recent decision, which featured in the press, confirms that the employment tribunal will not intervene where an employer’s decision to dismiss falls within the range of reasonable responses available to it in the circumstances, even where the decision may appear unfair to others.  

Hehir v Metroline ET 6018181/2024 

Facts of the case 

Mr Hehir was employed by Metroline as a bus driver. An incident occurred while he was on duty, when a male passenger stole a necklace from a female passenger near the driver’s cab and fled the bus. Mr Hehir ran after him, recovered the necklace and returned it to the female passenger on the bus. 

The events following this incident were disputed, however it was common ground that the male passenger returned towards the bus. Mr Hehir then punched him, knocking him unconscious, before detaining him on the pavement for almost 30 minutes until the police arrived. 

Mr Hehir was arrested. However, the police took no further action after reviewing the CCTV footage and concluding that Mr Hehir’s force was proportionate and necessary in the circumstances to defend himself and the female passenger. The police case review determined that the male passenger threw the first punch and missed, before being struck once by Mr Hehir. 

Metroline reached a different conclusion and suspended Mr Hehir to investigate allegations that he had: 

1. brought the company into disrepute 

2. physically assaulted a passenger 

3. failed to follow key safety procedures. 

The CCTV footage was central to the investigation and, unlike the police, Metroline concluded that Mr Hehir had used excessive and disproportionate force. Metroline interpreted the footage to show the male passenger returning to the bus with the “clear intention” of apologising to the female passenger. 

Metroline found Mr Hehir guilty of all three allegations and summarily dismissed him for gross misconduct. Mr Hehir subsequently brought a claim against Metroline for unfair dismissal.  

Employment tribunal decision 

The tribunal clearly set out its role in deciding whether Metroline acted within the range of reasonable responses open to it, and crucially, the tribunal noted it “must not substitute its view for that of the reasonable employer”. 

Consequently, the tribunal found that Metroline had properly considered Mr Hehir’s explanation and the police review. Although the police had reached a different conclusion about the CCTV, the tribunal confirmed that Metroline was entitled to rely on its own interpretation. 

The tribunal noted the seriousness with which Metroline viewed breaches of safety procedures and the public-facing nature of the incident. It held that Metroline had a genuine belief, formed on reasonable grounds, that misconduct had occurred. On that basis, the dismissal was held to be fair, and Mr Hehir’s claim was dismissed. 

The Birketts view 

This case is a clear reminder of the wide discretion employers have when deciding whether an employee should be dismissed. The tribunal reaffirmed that its role is not to decide whether dismissal was the best or even the fairest decision, but only whether it was one a reasonable employer could have reached. This judgment demonstrates that decisions that some might consider harsh or surprising can still fall within the range of reasonable responses. 

The outcome also demonstrates that employers are entitled to apply their own standards to form their own view of the evidence, even where external bodies such as the police reach a different conclusion. Provided the employer follows a fair process and forms a genuine belief on reasonable grounds, the tribunal will not intervene. 

Care should always be taken to ensure investigations are fully documented, the evidence is properly considered, and the reasoning for dismissal is clearly explained. For employers, this will maximise the likelihood that any dismissal decision will fall within the range of reasonable responses and withstand tribunal scrutiny.