British Airways Unfairly Dismissed Cabin Crew Member, Tribunal Rules

A UK employment tribunal has ordered British Airways to pay £29,195.69 to a cabin crew member it unfairly dismissed in July 2024 over a 'mile-high club' comment, after finding the airline's investigation fell short of a reasonable standard.

The Reading Employment Tribunal ruled that BA dismissed Mr C Mateo, who had flown for the carrier since 21 September 2018 without a single disciplinary warning, substantively unfairly. Employment judge Anna Macey concluded the airline genuinely believed the allegations against him — but the investigation underpinning that belief was not thorough enough.

The case was first decided in May this year; the full reasons followed a remedy hearing this month.

Why did the tribunal find the dismissal unfair?

The tribunal identified two central procedural failures:

• BA interviewed Mateo before obtaining a full account of events from the complainant.
• The airline failed to question the complainant in sufficient depth about her allegation that Mateo had touched her knee.

Judge Macey accepted that BA had a genuine belief Mateo made the 'mile-high club' comment, deliberately touched the colleague's leg and told her sexual stories about two other women. The unfairness turned not on disbelief but on process: an employer's honest conviction does not survive a flawed investigation.

The allegations themselves were serious. The complainant, on a rest break behind a privacy curtain during a flight, said Mateo approached her and started a non-work conversation. A colleague who checked on her afterwards reported: 'He just asked me if I want to be part of the mile-high club.' In her statement to BA, the complainant said: 'I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable, and my privacy was totally invaded.' Another colleague reported her saying: 'I was just trying to be nice, but I need to learn how to be blunt with people.'

What compensation did Mateo receive?

The £29,195.69 total breaks down into three components:

• £1,924.96 basic award
• £25,024.48 compensatory award
• £2,246.25 for wrongful dismissal, after the tribunal found BA breached his contract by dismissing him without his full notice period

The tribunal cut the awards twice. It applied a 30% Polkey reduction to the compensatory award, reflecting the chance he would have been dismissed anyway after a fair process. It also found Mateo 20% responsible for his own dismissal, a reduction applied to both the basic and compensatory awards.

Notably, the tribunal refused reinstatement. Judge Macey said BA held a genuine and rational belief that he had committed serious sexual harassment allegations and that trust and confidence had irretrievably broken down. The tribunal also found his conduct in approaching the complainant during her break blameworthy — 'strange behaviour' and an invasion of her privacy — though it saw insufficient evidence he would repeat either the alleged conduct or the blameworthy behaviour.

For HR teams and employees, the ruling is a reminder that a defensible dismissal rests on investigation quality, not belief sincerity — and for workers with clean records, procedural shortcuts can convert even strong allegations into a payout. Further remedy-stage judgments in similar cases may sharpen how tribunals weigh Polkey reductions where conduct is partly established.