When a Joke Costs £10,000: The Serious Lessons from the Michael Jackson Tribunal

Introduction

Employment tribunals rarely hit the headlines for cases involving pop star impressions. Yet in 2025, the Manchester Employment Tribunal awarded over £10,000 to an employee dismissed after allegedly making “Michael Jackson noises” at work. The case may sound unusual — but the judgment reinforces one of the most important truths in UK employment law: it is not the incident itself, but the employer’s process, documents, and decisions that determine whether a dismissal stands up in court. As a business owner, this case should make you stop and think: if one employee made a poor joke in my workplace, would my disciplinary process protect me — or cost me £10,000+ in a tribunal?👉 Protect your business with a FREE HR Health Check — ensure your contracts, handbooks, and processes are watertight.

What Happened?

- The employee was accused of making high-pitched “hee-hee” noises (linked to Michael Jackson).- A colleague complained that the noises were offensive and possibly racist.- The employer dismissed the worker outright — no prior warnings, no graduated sanctions, no clear zero-tolerance policy referenced.- The tribunal accepted the behaviour was “juvenile” and inappropriate, but crucially found the dismissal was procedurally unfair. The outcome: compensation exceeding £10,000, despite the tribunal acknowledging the employee’s conduct was immature. Source: Sky News coverage (https://news.sky.com/story/man-sacked-after-impersonating-michael-jackson-was-unfairly-dismissed-tribunal-finds-13420129)

Why Did the Tribunal Find Unfair Dismissal?

1. Employment Rights Act 1996 (s.98): Dismissal must be for a potentially fair reason (conduct, capability, redundancy, illegality, or 'some other substantial reason') AND must be handled reasonably. Here, while 'conduct' was arguable, the reasonableness test failed.2. ACAS Code of Practice: Requires investigation, opportunity for the employee to respond, graduated warnings where appropriate, and consistency with prior cases. None of these steps were evidenced.3. Comparable Case Law:- British Leyland UK Ltd v Swift (1981): set out the 'range of reasonable responses' test.- Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd (1987): even if misconduct is genuine, dismissal will be unfair if the correct process is not followed.

The Real Risk for Business Owners

Too many SMEs assume tribunal risk is low. But cases like this highlight the exposures. Financial: Basic award + compensatory award. Even 'small' misconduct claims can cost £10,000–£20,000. Your business reputation can be affected as the negative publicity can harm the company image. Preparing bundles, attending hearings, paying solicitors will be very expensive and will impact the time that should be devoted to your business. You may set a Precedent: Once a business is seen to mishandle dismissals, other employees may be more willing to bring claims.

What This Means for You as a Business Owner

This case demonstrates that documents, policy, and process are your first and last line of defence. Without them:- Your contracts don’t allow you to enforce standards.- Your handbook doesn’t show staff what’s unacceptable.- Your process leaves you wide open in tribunal. It’s not about whether you think misconduct happened — it’s about whether you can prove you handled it fairly, consistently, and in line with the law.

How to Protect Your Business

✅ Contracts & Handbooks: Ensure every employee signs terms that reference your disciplinary procedure and handbook.✅ Disciplinary Policy: Set out unacceptable behaviours, steps for warnings, and potential dismissal grounds.✅ Manager Training: Teach managers to investigate, document, and apply the ACAS Code.✅ HR Health Check: Audit your policies, contracts, and processes against current law.👉 At HR Matters, we specialise in ensuring SMEs have the documentation and processes needed to survive tribunal scrutiny. Book your FREE HR Health Check today.

Closing Thought

In employment law, perception often trumps intention. An employee making 'embarrassing noises' may sound trivial — but without the right process, it cost one employer £10,000 and national press coverage. Don’t let poor documentation or shortcuts expose your business. Get it right now, before a tribunal judge gets the last word.