Carer sacked for taking disabled patient home for New Year dinner in ‘act of kindness’

Carer sacked for taking disabled patient home for New Year dinner in ‘act of kindness’ Mr McPhail sued for unfair dismissal at an employment tribunal in Glasgow, arguing he did 'a good thing' - Bookmark A carer who took a disabled patient to his family home for a New Year's Day dinner was sacked for his “act of kindness”. Paul McPhail, a support worker, extended the invitation after learning that the patient's family could not accommodate him. The tribunal heard that Mr McPhail noted the patient was “agitated”, so he consulted his brother, who approved the idea. Mr McPhail was fired by the Lifeways Group for “unprofessional” conduct and was accused of developing a personal relationship with the patient. Despite arguing that he was doing “a good thing”, his unfair dismissal claim at a Glasgow employment tribunal was thrown out. Mr McPhail worked for the Lifeways Group from August 2018 until his dismissal in April 2025, providing 24/7 care for the patient, who cannot be named for legal reasons. The patient's brother's welfare guardianship had lapsed at the time of the incident. In February 2025, a social worker advised Mr McPhail's deputy line manager that he had admitted to taking the patient to his home on New Year's Day. Mr McPhail was invited to an investigation meeting. It was alleged that he had taken the patient to his home, failed to document the event on New Year's Day, and not declared a conflict of interest to his professional relationship. In the investigation meeting, Mr McPhail said: "I wrote down that he came to my house and had a great New Year’s dinner with me and my family. "I even have pictures of [the service user] at mine during it with my family and sent them to [the service user’s] brother, he was very pleased with it. "Was me, the wife, my daughter, the wean and dog. [The service user] had a great time, even asked when he is coming back. "I jokingly said ‘aye maybe next year’. It was a lovely gesture I felt. Social work did compliment the service. "Even you complimented me. Last thing I want to do is cause or do anything wrong." He was then invited to a disciplinary meeting. At the meeting, he said: "We had been going through a turbulent time in the service. Staff members had left, and one long-standing staff member had died. "The place was in turmoil. The [service users] family was upset with prior staff and were concerned for his welfare. "[He] was self-harming, agitated and asking for [the member of staff who died]. "The family then stated that the [service user] couldn’t go home with them for New Year’s Day, so I suggested to family that I could take him to my home for New Year’s Day and they approved this. "I then asked my wife if it would be ok, and she said yes it would be lovely. Upon my return to the service, I told Lizzie McKnight that I would be taking him home for that day and she said that would be nice. I told Amir also and no-one said anything about it. "I feel I was doing a good thing. I did cross a boundary, but I always had the best interests of the [service user] in mind." After this meeting, Mr McPhail was dismissed for gross misconduct and this was confirmed in a letter. The letter said: "Suggesting and agreeing to take [the service user] to your home with your family members present is a breach of boundaries and you did so fully aware of the identified risks associated with [the service user]. "Not only did you put [the service user] at risk, but you also put yourself and your family members at risk. "We expect all Lifeways employees to follow and adhere to the company’s policies and procedures. "It is further note that [the service users] brother is not welfare guardian and currently the local authority holds guardianship. "As an employee of Lifeways, you have responsibility to inform management of this conflict of interest which you failed to do. "I also find your actions demonstrates an abuse of power and authority, and it is evident through the disciplinary hearing that you do not understand the severity of your actions. "You had no authority or power to make this decision in relation to [the service user] and neither did the brother. "You failed to check this with management. I do not believe in the balance of probability that you 'ran this past' the deputy manager and that she said to you 'that will be nice'. "I find that management were not aware of what took place on the 1st of January 2025 until it was raised as a concern from social work." Employment Judge Muriel Robison ruled that Mr McPhail had not been unfairly dismissed. He said: "[Mr McPhail's] representatives asked the Tribunal to find that [he] was a professional and considered carer in a 24/7 service in the service users home which I have no reason to doubt. "I fully understand why [he] believes he has been harshly treated for what he says was 'an act of kindness' in difficult circumstances at work, and why he does not think it was sufficiently serious to justify his dismissal. "However, as he will now be fully aware, there is a range of reasonable responses open to an employer and even if this Tribunal considers that dismissal was too harsh in the particular circumstances, the particular context in which the respondent operates means that what might be reasonable in one context is not in another. "I could not therefore say that dismissal in the particular circumstances of this case was unfair because dismissal for gross misconduct was within range of reasonable responses open to the respondent. The claim must therefore be dismissed."