A recent ruling by a UK employment tribunal has determined that browsing online shopping websites during work hours is not a sufficient reason for dismissal. The case involved an accountancy administrator who successfully argued that her online activities were not excessive and were, therefore, not grounds for termination.

The employee, who was referred to as Ms. A Lanuszka in the tribunal, was dismissed in July 2023 after her employer employed monitoring software to track her computer usage. Evidence revealed that she had spent time browsing on sites such as Rightmove and Amazon.

The tribunal awarded Ms. Lanuszka over £14,000, concluding that her conduct was not unreasonable. The judge emphasized that the employee's usage did not violate any explicit company policy. Notably, the employer was also found to have previously used company time for personal reasons.

Employment Judge Michael Magee highlighted that Ms. Lanuszka's wrongful dismissal was influenced by the timing of events at the company. Specifically, he noted that her dismissal coincided with the relocation of the business owner's sister to the UK, suggesting ulterior motives behind her termination.

Judge Magee indicated that Ms. Lanuszka was dismissed before reaching the two-year employment threshold necessary to file a claim for unfair dismissal under UK law. She had been employed by Accountancy MK since 2017 and had signed a new contract in September 2021 following a company name change.

During the period leading up to her dismissal, it was reported that Ms. Krauze, the business owner, had placed spyware on Ms. Lanuszka's computer, which documented over an hour and twenty minutes spent on personal matters over two days. However, Judge Magee clarified that a significant portion of this time was spent on professional development, including training in Excel. Furthermore, there was no existing policy preventing personal use of the computer, as indicated by the owner's behavior.

The tribunal ruled that Ms. Lanuszka had not received any prior warnings or indications regarding her conduct, which amounted to unfair dismissal. Judge Magee criticized the documentation presented as evidence against her, highlighting that entries regarding performance issues were created after the fact, further undermining the employer's case.