Wetherspoon manager sacked for allowing discount for staff member at Welsh pub

North Wales Live

2 days ago

A former JD Wetherspoon pub manager has won an employment tribunal after the chain sacked him for allowing a colleague a 50% food discount. Peter Castagna-Davies - who had 22 years of unblemished service at the chain - was dismissed from his role as a shift leader at the Pontlottyn pub in Abertillery.
Mr Castagna-Davies had put the items – two portions of halloumi fries, two portions of chicken breast bites, and two cans of Monster energy drink – through the till for kitchen worker Noah Gardiner and applied a half-off discount for shift staff.
An internal investigation found he had breached policy by allowing Mr Gardiner to buy "excessive products" at the 50% rate and to take the food home, reports Walesonline.
The Cardiff employment tribunal heard Mr Castagna-Davies had not been aware that two minutes before he approved the items, Mr Gardiner had used a different manager's till key to process another free meal for himself – chicken breast bites and a can of Monster Punch.
Wetherspoon's disciplinary chairman Chris Jenkins decided to fire Mr Castagna-Davies, telling him: "Shortly before you processed Noah's 50% on-shift discount he had processed through the till his own staff feeding meal, some two hours after his break when he had consumed it, which you had no knowledge of him doing so or even going on his break.
"I find this both worrying and surprising that, as the duty manager with so few staff to manage on the shift in question, you had no knowledge or control over what was going on."
Two months before the ill-fated discount – which happened at 8.04pm on January 31, 2024 – the chain had internally circulated rules stating only one item from the food menu and one soft drink were available for free to employees on a shift.
Employees wishing to add extra items could purchase them at half price and if they wanted to take food home the discount would only be 20%.
Pontlottyn manager Sarah Newton had messaged the pub's employee group chat saying the company was "cracking down" because staff at other pubs had taken multiple 50% orders home.
She warned there had been cases when use of the discount had led to disciplinary investigations.
In the tribunal, Wetherspoon's witnesses said there had been "a crackdown on the 50% discount because staff had been caught taking food home to feed their whole family". They claimed the business had suffered "significant" costs, which led it to adopt a "corporate zero-tolerance attitude towards abuse of the staff discount".
Wetherspoon uses a system called IntelliQ to flag potential staff fraud. A week after the discount was approved by Mr Castagna-Davies, the system flagged concern over the transaction.
Ms Newton told him "mistakes happen" but that he should be careful because the company "really were cracking down on it". Mr Castagna-Davies responded that he was disappointed in himself for the mistake.
An investigating manager, Keri Blanchard, interviewed Mr Gardiner, who said he had cooked the food himself. Asked if he had eaten his initial free meal on-site, he replied: "I should've yeah, I don't take food home any more."
But he then admitted he had taken home the items put through by Mr Castagna-Davies. Asked if he had requested a 50% discount, Mr Gardiner said: "I just asked for someone to put it through."
When Mr Castagna-Davies was interviewed he said he could not remember the transaction but that he may have mistakenly "pressed the wrong button" in applying a discount of 50% rather than 20%. He denied being aware Mr Gardiner planned to take the food home.
Mr Jenkins dismissed him without notice. Although he acknowledged Mr Castagna-Davies' clean disciplinary record over 22 years, he pointed out Wetherspoon had been "vigorous" in communicating its zero-tolerance approach.
He also believed Mr Castagna-Davies had known the food would be taken home as it was not "normal for staff at the pub to eat that much food during their breaks".
In an appeal, Mr Castagna-Davies drew on evidence from four witnesses to argue Mr Gardiner "had ordered the food in a deceptive way". But Wetherspoon area manager Dannie Stephens upheld the dismissal, telling him he had "failed to lead, manage and organise your shift sufficiently to prevent the breach".
At the tribunal, Judge Rachel Harfield noted "the staff discount system is one built on trust" and that regular abuse would be costly to Wetherspoon. But she concluded it was not reasonable for Ms Stephens to conclude this was a case of "gross incompetence or gross negligence, as opposed to being simple negligence that falls within the misconduct category of the respondent's policy".
The judge added: "There is no evidence that Dannie Stephens gave any thought to that at all. She seems simply to have operated on the basis that the claimant should have managed the shift better, that if he had done so the breach would not have happened, therefore the claimant should be held responsible for the breach, and it was possible under the policy to dismiss for a single act.
"There was no weighing of the actual seriousness of the claimant's actions in their actual context. Dannie Stephens seemed to have viewed the claimant as diligent in other areas. It was one incident on one shift that he could have managed better. He was an employee with long service and a clear disciplinary record. The decision to uphold the dismissal at appeal stage was not within the reasonable range. In my judgement that rendered the whole dismissal unfair."
A payout is yet to be decided. Judge Harfield encouraged the parties to attempt a settlement before a remedy hearing takes place.
WalesOnline has asked Wetherspoon if it will be reviewing its approach to disciplinary matters in light of the judge's findings.