Mechanical Engineer Wins Claims for Unpaid Wages and Holiday Against Metroline Travel Limited

Mr D Calder began working as a mechanical engineer for Metroline Travel Limited in 2016. The dispute began in January 2022, when Dan Harris sent an email to Adrian Jones stating that Mr Calder was only completing one inspection instead of two.

According to the tribunal's findings, Mr Calder and Mr Harris had a discussion regarding the inspections. This discussion was witnessed by Mr Baig. The tribunal found that Mr Calder was angry during this meeting and refused to perform two bus inspections per shift. Following this discussion, Mr Harris informed Mr Calder that he was being suspended.

The tribunal heard that Mr Calder was alleged to have engaged in abusive and threatening behaviour toward a manager on 1 February 2022. On 16 February 2022, Mr Calder arrived at the Cricklewood garage for a disciplinary hearing. The tribunal found that he attempted to speak with Mr Harvey but left the premises before the scheduled 12 noon start time. During the meeting that followed, Mr Calder handed a letter to one of Mr Harvey's colleagues, which he intended to be his response to the disciplinary allegations.

The tribunal found that Mr Calder's pay was stopped during his suspension. On 25 July 2022, the respondent issued a grievance appeal outcome rejecting the grievance. Eventually, James Harvey decided that Mr Calder's conduct met the definition of gross misconduct and dismissed him. Mr Calder submitted an appeal against the dismissal around 20 February 2023, but the tribunal found the appeal was rejected on 10 August 2023.

The tribunal found that the claims for unfair dismissal, harassment related to race, victimisation, and breach of contract failed. Regarding the unfair dismissal, the tribunal said, "The complaint of unfair dismissal does not succeed." The judge found the procedure was not so unreasonable that it fell outside the band of reasonable responses.

However, the tribunal found that several other claims succeeded. The tribunal said, "The complaint of breach of the Working Time Regulations 1998 ("WTR") is well-founded." It also found the claim for unauthorised deduction from wages was well-founded, because the tribunal found there was no proper basis to withhold Mr Calder's pay.

The tribunal also found in favour of Mr Calder regarding his unused holiday entitlement, noting that the respondent's argument that he stopped accruing annual leave after March 2022 would fail. Additionally, the tribunal found that the claim under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 succeeded. The tribunal also found that a document sent on 6 September 2021 was a protected act and that the respondent failed to engage with Mr Calder's request to provide written submissions instead of attending the hearing.

• Unauthorised deduction from wages: £40,691.34
• Unused holiday entitlement: £4,193.24
• Section 38 of the Employment Act 2002: £1,142

This case demonstrates that even when a dismissal is found to be lawful, employers must still adhere to rules regarding pay and holiday entitlement. It is important for employers to ensure that any deductions from wages are legally justified and that all staff receive the holiday pay they have accrued.

If a worker believes their employer has failed to pay them correctly or has breached working time regulations, they can seek assistance. Anyone with a problem at work can get free, impartial advice from Acas.

• Acas: The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service: a free, impartial public body that advises on problems at work and helps employers and workers settle disputes.
• Breach of contract: Not doing what the employment contract requires; in a tribunal it usually means notice pay or other money owed when the job ended.
• Claimant: The person who brings the claim, usually the worker or former worker.
• Gross misconduct: Behaviour serious enough for an employer to dismiss someone straight away, without notice.
• Harassment: Unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic, or of a sexual nature, that violates someone's dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
• Respondent: The employer, or other person or organisation, the claim is made against.
• Unfair dismissal: Being dismissed without a fair reason, or in an unfair way. Most employees need to have worked for a minimum period to claim it.
• Unlawful deduction from wages: Taking money out of someone's pay without the right to, or not paying wages that were due.
• Victimisation: Treating someone badly because they complained about discrimination, or helped someone else who did.
• Well-founded: The tribunal's phrase for a claim that succeeds. "Not well-founded" means it fails.
• Working time regulations: Laws that set out rules on working hours, rest breaks, and holidays.

Case numbers: 3300701/2023, 3311222/2023
Claimant: Mr D Calder
Respondent: Metroline Travel Limited
Tribunal: Employment Tribunal, Watford (Employment Judge Quill)
Decision date: 26 August 2026

Read the full decision on GOV.UK

Topics: breach of contract, contract of employment, disability discrimination, public interest disclosure, race discrimination, unfair dismissal

This report explains a published tribunal decision in plain English. It is general information, not legal advice.

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.