Unfair Dismissal Org – Reliable, practical expert advice beyond the basics
Have you experienced unfair dismissal or facing disciplinary action? Unfair Dismissal Org. offers practical expert legal advice that you can utilize immediately to stop, document, establish, save your job or pursue your valid unfair dismissal claim at the employment tribunal. Before proceeding, we alway recommend starting from ➡︎ due diligence.
The Basics You Must Know
an unfair dismissal situation, the starting point at any stage is knowledge. UDO breaks it down into an easy but comprehensive guide.
⬇︎Unfair dismissal - gross misconduct can you be guilty and still win ?
⬇︎Hidden reason your employer might use (the SOSR pivot)
⬇︎Were your unfair dismissed for SOSR, for misconduct — or for an automaticallyunfair reason ?
⬇︎Can not appealing unfair dismissal fail you otherwise well founded unfair dismissal ?
Yes - you can be guilty and still win unfair dismissal claim
Let me explain this to you: ordinary unfair dismissals in cases of gross misconduct are not about whether you are guilty or not but about whether your employer: ✓ Held an honest belief that you committed the misconduct, ✓ based this belief on reasonable grounds, and ✓ established these all through a reasonable investigation ? All three are separate from the Acas Code. Meaning, even "IF" your employer followed Acas to the letter they could still fail the Burchell test, the key in conduct-based unfair dismissal. And it may also be the case that they did not follow the Acas but met Burchell test. Conversely, even if Burchell is met in all three layers, your unfair dismissal is then measured against subsection four of section 98 of the ERA 1996. Which asks the followings: ✓ Has your employer acted reasonably or unreasonably in treating what they believe to be a sufficient reason for your dismissal, ✓ while considering all circumstances, their resources, policies and alternatives ? It’s a two-angle approach on a multi layer test. If you’ve experienced unfair dismissal for gross misconduct or you’re currently in a disciplinary process, the key is to understand how to turn gross-misconduct into cross-misconduct. ➡︎ Gross Misconduct Guide.
Hidden reason of dismissal your employer may try to use
Not getting a straight answer about your unfair dismissal? Your employer said “conduct”… then the reason changed halfway through? It may have been a “quick” shift change, apology or mediation that somehow ended in dismissal? That’s the SOSR switch (“some other substantial reason”) — the catch-all employers use to turn a messy conduct case into loss of trust or relationship breakdown. SOSR = “some other substantial reason” under s.98(1)(b) ERA 1996. It’s a flexible label that can appear in two common ways: 1.When conduct looks shaky. The story morphs into “loss of trust and confidence”, “relationship breakdown”, “client pressure”, or “reputational risk”. It’s less about proving you “did it” and more about saying the relationship can’t continue. 2.When the employer pushes for a change. Think of contractual changes (hours, shift, location, role tweak). The employer may offer alternatives or protections (trial period, pay protection, training). If you refuse without clear reasons or counter-proposals, they may frame it as SOSR (business need + reasonable offer + employee refusal). Early signs to watch (both scenarios): Escalating talk of “trust”, “attitude”, or “not constructive”. Mediation presented as a test of cooperation (with a vague agenda). Shifts/transfers proposed as “reasonable”, with pressure to accept fast. Minutes keep changing; small frictions are logged as “relationship” issues. Evidence requests met with snippets/anonymised statements only. The legal check still applies (s.98(4)): Did they rely on SOSR genuinely? Did they try reasonable alternatives (warning, mediation, supervision, redeployment, trial period)? Were you treated consistently with others? Was the procedure fair (clear notice, hearing, appeal)? Play it smart (homepage quick version): Stay polite, factual, brief. Co-operate on neutral terms: e.g., time-limited mediation with a written agenda; trial period for a role change with a review date. Ask for the investigation report and full, named witness statements (not snippets). If you refuse a change, give reasons and a counter-proposal (hours, location, timeframe). Log dates, offers, and any shifting story.
➡︎ Gross Misconduct Guide.
I will be straight with you: what most people call retaliation often turns up in law as “some other substantial reason” under section 98(1)(b) ERA 1996 - it is called SOSR. Employers reach for it when a conduct case is shaky. It’s usually described as:
✓ “loss of trust and confidence”,
✓ “relationship breakdown”,
✓ “client pressure”, or
✓ “reputational risk”.
This is not about proving you “did it”. It is them saying the working relationship cannot continue. The face of this appreach is hiden behind intelectual impass created by your unfair employer.
All of that is separate from the Burchell test for conduct. They still have to run a fair process and look at alternatives before dismissal, but during the disciplinary you will be faced with hiden questions to build such case against you.
The same rule applies, even if SOSR is relied on, the tribunal still measures the decision against section 98(4) ERA 1996, which asks:
✓ Was SOSR the genuine, principal reason?
✓ Did they consider reasonable alternatives (warning, mediation, supervision, redeployment)?
✓ Was treatment consistent with similar cases?
✓ Was the procedure fair (notice of the case, hearing, appeal)?
Here is why this matters now: in real disciplinaries, employers start building a “broken trust” story from small things—tone in emails, delays, changes in minuts, imposing mediation, change of shift, transfer to different department or apologies they know you refuse. That’s how a minor allegation turns into SOSR.
The Acas code is very often breached in most cases but this on its own will not win your case. Acas only provide uplift if you win the case.
Therefore, you’ve been dismissed or you’re in a disciplinary process, the key is to test whether “loss of trust” is real—and to surface any protected reason behind it.
Next, I’ll show you—step by step—how to avoid that trap (cooperate on neutral terms, offer time-limited alternatives, document investigation gaps without feeding SOSR). ➡︎ Gross Misconduct Guide.
Were you dismissed for SOSR, may be a misconduct — or for an automatically unfair reason?
I will be straight with you: what most people call retaliation often turns up in law as “some other substantial reason” under section 98(1)(b) ERA 1996 - it is called SOSR. Employers reach for it when a conduct case is shaky. It’s usually described as:
✓ “loss of trust and confidence”,
✓ “relationship breakdown”,
✓ “client pressure”, or
✓ “reputational risk”.
This is not about proving you “did it”. It is them saying the working relationship cannot continue. The face of this appreach is hiden behind intelectual impass created by your unfair employer.
All of that is separate from the Burchell test for conduct. They still have to run a fair process and look at alternatives before dismissal, but during the disciplinary you will be faced with hiden questions to build such case against you.
The same rule applies, even if SOSR is relied on, the tribunal still measures the decision against section 98(4) ERA 1996, which asks:
✓ Was SOSR the genuine, principal reason?
✓ Did they consider reasonable alternatives (warning, mediation, supervision, redeployment)?
✓ Was treatment consistent with similar cases?
✓ Was the procedure fair (notice of the case, hearing, appeal)?
Here is why this matters now: in real disciplinaries, employers start building a “broken trust” story from small things—tone in emails, delays, changes in minuts, imposing mediation, change of shift, transfer to different department or apologies they know you refuse. That’s how a minor allegation turns into SOSR.
The Acas code is very often breached in most cases but this on its own will not win your case. Acas only provide uplift if you win the case.
Therefore, you’ve been dismissed or you’re in a disciplinary process, the key is to test whether “loss of trust” is real—and to surface any protected reason behind it.
Next, I’ll show you—step by step—how to avoid that trap (cooperate on neutral terms, offer time-limited alternatives, document investigation gaps without feeding SOSR). ➡︎ Gross Misconduct Guide.
Yes — you can win liability and still get £0 if you don’t appeal
Let me explain this to you: ordinary unfair dismissals after gross misconduct aren’t just about what happened; they’re about whether your employer acted reasonably under s.98(4) ERA 1996 — and the appeal is part of that picture.
✓ Tribunals judge the whole process (disciplinary + appeal). A proper appeal can cure defects (Taylor).
✓ If you don’t appeal, the tribunal can Polkey-reduce up to 100% if a proper appeal would have ended in the same dismissal.
✓ You may also face an Acas reduction (up to 25%) for unreasonably skipping the appeal.
Conversely, if you do appeal and keep the focus on sanction/fairness, you can still win:
✓ Show why dismissal was disproportionate — and set out alternatives (final warning, role change, training, last-chance).
✓ Press consistency with comparators and mitigation (service, record, context, low risk of recurrence).
✓ If a proper appeal would likely have avoided dismissal, there’s no Polkey deduction (and you can argue for an Acas uplift).
Read next: Appeal Against Gross Misconduct Dismissal — Why It Is Important
Legal Basis of Unfair Dismissal Cases
Connect with Us
Join the Conversation
