Autistic AA driver who joked about dropping colleagues from a window was unfairly sacked by boss who thought it ‘extremely inappropriate’ to ‘make feedback about bodily hurt’, tribunal guidelines

An autistic AA recovery driver who was sacked after he joked about dropping two of his colleagues out of a window was unfairly sacked by his boss, a tribunal has ruled.

Adrian Lloyd-Penny said that he was going to drop night manager Lyndon Tyler and dispatcher Dave Boddison ‘from a third storey b****y window’ during a heated phone call.

The recovery driver made the comment in ‘jest’ after his autism ‘flared up’ when he thought the pair had made a mistake, an employment tribunal heard.

Later that day he apologised to his colleagues, who took ‘no offence’ to the remark as ‘he was clearly joking’, the hearing was told.

Despite this, Mr Lloyd-Penny was called to a meeting where he was sacked as bosses found it was ‘incredibly inappropriate’ to ‘make comments about physical harm’.

The driver is now set for a payout after successfully suing the AA for disability discrimination.

An employment judge accepted that it is right for any ‘responsible’ employer’ to ‘take action’ against such remarks, even if they have been made as a ‘so-called joke’.

But, the panel ultimately upheld Mr Lloyd-Penny’s claim after ruling that his dismissal in this case was disproportionate.

The tribunal, held in Watford, heard Mr Lloyd-Penny started working for the AA in March 2023.

The employee, who has autistic spectrum condition, worked at the Enfield Depot in North London and was part of the recovery patrol, who attend emergency breakdowns at side of the road.

In August of that year, Mr Lloyd-Penny became annoyed over a perceived error made by two colleagues – Mr Tyler and Mr Boddison.

The tribunal saw a transcript from a telephone call in which he told a hander: ‘And it’s gonna take me at least two hours, if not two-and-a-half hours, to get home or to get to the depot anyway.

‘Aaahh, I hope to god I never meet the manager that I was dealing with or the dispatcher that give me this job.

‘Cos I’ll drop them from a third storey b****y window, the pair of them on their heads.’

Mr Tyler forwarded on a transcript from the call during an email exchange about ‘interactions’ with Mr Lloyd-Penny.

The night manager said that the driver was occasionally ‘argumentative and unreasonable’ on the phone, adding: ‘Find below an example of a call into the office this morning where Adrian mentions dropping myself and my recovery dispatcher off a 3rd story window onto our heads!

‘Please note myself or my dispatcher take no offence and he was clearly joking.’

Mr Tyler said Mr Lloyd-Penny is a ‘clearly a very capable driver’ and said the AA ‘need to support him with his condition’.

But later that month, the driver was invited to a probation review meeting which he was told may end in his dismissal.

During the meeting, Mr Lloyd-Penny was asked whether he had ever been ‘aggressive’ towards members of staff.

Manager Michael Townsend asked him: ‘Do you recall an incident with the indoor team where you advised the call handler that if you could see the dispatcher and night manager on that evening that you would go up there and drop them from the top story window onto their heads?’

In response, Mr Lloyd-Penny said the two employees – Mr Tyler and Mr Boddison – had ‘flared up’ and ‘ignited’ his autism and so he needed to ‘walk away from it’.

But, his manager told him that ‘threats of violence’ and ‘speaking to anyone in that manner is not acceptable’ and ended his probation.

Mr Townsend said: ‘No one should be coming into work at risk of being shouted and sworn at, and it’s incredibly inappropriate to call colleagues names or make comments about physical harm, even if the comments were meant in jest.’

The recovery driver sued the AA for disability discrimination and has now won.

Employment Judge Patrick Quill said: ‘In terms of how to treat comments such as those made [during the call] about dropping Tyler and Boddison on their heads from a large height, we accept that any responsible employer would wish to take action following, rather than ignore, such comments.

‘That is so even if the comments had been made as a so-called joke and/or were clearly intended as a figure of speech, rather than a literal threat to carry out the action.

‘Any reasonable employer would want to ensure that the employees have an appropriate working environment.’

The judge said the AA has ‘very clear legal duties’ to its employees including ‘statutory health and safety duties’.

Despite this, the panel upheld Mr Lloyd-Penny claims of disability discrimination.

The judge said Mr Townsend’s dismissal decision was ‘based on the fact that, because of [Mr Lloyd-Penny’s] autism… there was a future risk of [him] raising his voice and/or being angry and/or being aggressive to other colleagues or other customers in the future’.

The tribunal heard that Mr Lloyd-Perry ‘struggles with constant change’ and could become angry if ‘he feels he is not being heard’ due to his autism.

It recognised that when probationary proceedings were being arranged at short notice, Mr Lloyd-Perry’s wife had to communicate with bosses due to the distress caused to him. 

Providing a judgement, Judge Quill said: ‘We do not suggest that it would have been reasonable to expect the [AA] to have told its call handlers that they had no choice other than to put up with any and all abuse that [Mr Lloyd-Penny] delivered to them, regardless of what he said, or how he said it.

‘However, we also reject the argument that the only two options were either the proposition mentioned in the previous sentence, or else dismissing [him].’

The panel found that Mr Lloyd-Penny apologising to Mr Tyler after the comment was ‘significant’ to the ‘proportionality of the decision to dismiss’.

Other claims made by Mr Lloyd-Penny were dismissed.

A remedy hearing to decide his compensation will be held at a later date.