What happened
In Young v Royal Mail Group, a delivery driver posted two messages in a union WhatsApp group during a period of industrial action. One was crude abuse aimed at the employer. The other suggested named colleagues needed to choose sides, with a reference to a colleague's car being blown up, framed as a joke.
He was dismissed for gross misconduct. He argued the dismissal was automatically unfair because the real reason was that he had taken part in trade union activities. The Employment Appeal Tribunal disagreed, and the reasoning is useful for any employer.
Note the principle, not just the headline: it is about whether messages like these count as protected activity.
Where it is posted doesn't make it protected
The key point: a message isn't protected simply because of where it appears. A union or private group doesn't put its contents off limits. What matters is the content and character of the message, assessed on its own terms.
On the facts, the tribunal found that abuse aimed at the employer, and a message containing either a threat or a joke about violence, weren't properly characterised as participating in trade union activities. So the dismissal wasn't automatically unfair on that basis.
Judge the message by what was actually said, not by which app or group it was said in.
'It was private' and 'it was banter' are weak defences
This is the part that matters for everyday employers. When an employee posts something they shouldn't have, the two defences you hear most are 'it was a private chat' and 'it was only banter'. Neither is an automatic shield.
The location doesn't protect them, and the framing as a joke doesn't erase the content, especially where there is abuse or a threat. The character of what was said is what counts.
Don't be talked out of acting just because it was 'private' or 'a joke'. Look at the words and their effect.
What this means for you
If an employee posts abuse or threats in a work or group chat, you may well be able to act. But you still need a fair process: investigate properly, hear their side, consider the context, and follow your disciplinary procedure. The case doesn't give you a shortcut around that.
It is also a reminder to have a clear social media and acceptable-use policy, so everyone knows that conduct in group chats is still conduct at work. That makes these situations far easier and safer to handle.
Treat a serious group-chat message as a conduct matter, investigate it, and follow a fair process. Don't act in the heat of the moment.
“HR savvy, pragmatic and commercially driven. She helps with problems no matter how big or small. Highly recommend.”
Key takeaways
- A message isn't protected just because it is in a private or union group chat. Content and character are what count.
- 'It was a joke' or 'it was private' isn't an automatic shield, especially where there is abuse or a threat.
- You may be able to act, but you still need a fair process: investigate, hear them out, follow your procedure.
- A clear social media and acceptable-use policy makes these situations far easier to handle.
- Got a live one? Take the free Situation Check before you act.
Not ready to book? Just tell me what's going on and I'll come back to you. No obligation.
