Tribunal Rules British Manager Unfairly Dismissed for Remote Work

A British sales manager has been awarded compensation after an employment tribunal ruled he was unfairly dismissed for working remotely from Egypt. The tribunal found that Tanveer Shah, who held the position of UK Field Sales Manager at Food Hub, was not given a fair investigation prior to his termination.

The tribunal heard that Mr. Shah was expected to spend at least four days a week “in the field,” as part of his role. However, he was discovered to have been working remotely from Egypt, where he had family, for what was reported to be “several weeks.” The exact duration of his absence from the UK remains unclear. After concerns were raised about his lack of filed expenses compared to colleagues, he was dismissed by Ardian Mula, the CEO of Food Hub, in August 2022.

During the tribunal proceedings, Judge David Maxwell characterized the dismissal as having “fundamental flaws” in its investigation. Mr. Shah was ultimately awarded £61,419 in compensation for his unfair dismissal.

In early 2022, Mr. Mula initiated a review meeting with Mr. Shah to discuss his performance, noting that he had not been spending enough time “in the field.” At that time, Mr. Shah was already a high performer who had been promoted multiple times from his previous role as Field Sales Executive. The discussion led to a decision to extend Mr. Shah’s trial period in his newly promoted position, during which Simon Farmer became his line manager.

Farmer discovered that Mr. Shah had been out of the country beyond an authorized period of annual leave. Mr. Shah explained that he had been in Egypt for a holiday at the end of 2021 and subsequently contracted COVID-19, which prevented his return to the UK. Judge Maxwell noted that Mr. Shah was “unable to say whether he had been in Egypt for days, a week or several weeks” at the end of 2021 and the beginning of 2022, describing it as a surprising gap in his memory given the expectations of his role.

In February 2022, Mr. Shah’s line manager learned he had not purchased a car, which was mandated by a recent policy change requiring employees to use a personal vehicle rather than a company-issued one. Concerns arose regarding Mr. Shah’s commitment to his duties, leading to an ultimatum for him to acquire a car within two weeks.

After eventually purchasing a vehicle, Mr. Mula confronted Mr. Shah in August 2022 about his remote work and insufficient expense claims. He accused Mr. Shah of “illegitimately taking a salary” while not fulfilling his job responsibilities. According to the tribunal, Mr. Mula was so upset that he dismissed Mr. Shah on the spot.

Following the dismissal, Mr. Mula consulted a human resources representative who cautioned that the dismissal would likely be deemed unfair by an employment tribunal. Mr. Shah, described as having a record of “unblemished good service,” subsequently filed a lawsuit for unfair dismissal, which was upheld by the tribunal.

The judge concluded that the investigation into Mr. Shah’s conduct was flawed and noted that a business partner recognized that the initial dismissal by Mr. Mula would almost certainly be found unfair. This led to efforts to create an appearance of a fair process while ultimately pursuing the same outcome.