Man sacked after standing up in Microsoft Teams call with no pants on

North Wales Live

16-05-2025

A middle-ranking employee was sacked after inadvertently exposing his private parts during a video conference. The man, whose identity has not been disclosed in court documents, challenged his former employer for unfair dismissal at a tribunal, but his claim was rejected.
In 2020, the individual joined the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) – a statutory organisation designed to safeguard customers when financial services companies collapse – as a change specialist. His role was subsequently upgraded to digital production manager the following year, resulting in a salary increase of approximately £4,000, bringing his annual earnings to £58,580.
On 8 May 2023, which was a bank holiday due to the King's coronation, the employee was participating in a Microsoft Teams work call with external contractors from the Capgemini tech consultancy.
During the call, he stood up to adjust a cable behind his computer. He was not wearing any clothing below the waist, and his genitals were visible.
The employment tribunal was informed that the incident led to a complaint from colleagues. Following the initiation of an investigation by his line manager, the employee provided his version of events, reports Wales Online.
He claimed: "That was a bank holiday and l did not realise when l folded the laptop camera was on and pointing to the floor and then immediately shut down the camera so that don't know what was seen in the floor [sic]."
The employee went on: "It is just an accident and apologies." He admitted he did not always "wear full dress" at home.
He also argued he was not culpable for his actions because they occurred on a bank holiday, adding: "Expecting me to work during public holidays is a racial discrimination."
The tribunal heard he holds dual Australian and British citizenship but states he is Indian and was born in India.
Sabah Carter, a senior figure at the FSCS, rejected the suggestion that its dress code did not apply on public holidays.
Ms Carter found the employee's actions had damaged the FSCS' reputation. She noted he had "not shown any remorse or apologised for his actions but rather sought to blame the external contractors on the call".
She was also unimpressed by inconsistent evidence from the employee who initially admitted his genitals were visible before changing his story to claim he was wearing "nude-coloured underwear".
After being sacked the employee brought a tribunal claim for unfair dismissal as well as race discrimination. He claimed not only that he had been wrongly dismissed but also that he had been passed over for a promotion because of discrimination.
The employee said: "The entire process and outcome is nothing but racial discrimination, mental harassment, unfair dismissal."
But the tribunal panel noted he had not been required to work on the bank holiday and had in fact chosen to do so. They added: "Second, even if he were required to work inappropriately, that is no reason for appearing in a state of undress."
Though the panel accepted he had initially apologised they found he later "sought to obscure or deflect blame" and failed to "consistently show remorse".
The panel found it was reasonable for the FSCS to dismiss the employee. They also threw out his complaint about being denied a promotion, concluding his application had been "poor and failed to reveal sufficient relevant experience".
They continued: "The position applied for was approximately twice the claimant's salary and FSCS was seeking relevant experience, particularly in heading departments."