Full Breakdown
Disabled Glassworker Wins £329,000 After Unlawful Dismissal
5/16/2026, 1:15:40 AM
The Dismissal and Surveillance
In October 2019 Pilkington UK Ltd, a St Helens glass-making firm, dismissed team-leader Alan Jones on grounds of gross misconduct. The company had hired the surveillance firm Mike India Five Ltd after a colleague reported seeing Jones in work boots. Footage showed Jones on a friend’s farm in Cronton, briefly handing a bag of potatoes and passing a hose. Pilkington presented the video as proof that Jones was working while on sick leave, despite his known disability and without seeking updated medical evidence.
Background: Jones’s Disability and Employment History
Jones, 59, has radiation-induced neuropathy—a chronic, painful condition resulting from radiotherapy for Hodgkin’s lymphoma at age 21. The illness caused severe shoulder muscle loss, fatigue and depression, rendering him unfit for manual work. He began his career at Pilkington in 1983 as an apprentice and remained with the company for four decades, rising to a team-leader role.
Legal Timeline
- Oct 2019 – Dismissal after disciplinary hearing.
- Aug 2021 – Employment Tribunal rules dismissal unlawful, citing disability discrimination.
- Apr 2023 – Employment Appeal Tribunal dismisses Pilkington’s appeal.
- 2024 – Pilkington agrees to pay £329,000 in damages and lost earnings; Jones suffers a heart attack and undergoes double-bypass surgery during the legal battle.
Data & Compensation
- Compensation awarded: > £329,000.
- Legal representation: Thompsons Solicitors (Bernie Wentworth, head of employment rights).
- Union support: Unite the Union (Stephen Pinder, legal director).
Official Statements & Responses
Pilkington issued a statement acknowledging its failure, noting an “in-depth review” to prevent similar mistakes. Thompsons Solicitors emphasized that the case demonstrates the risks of relying on assumptions rather than medical evidence when dealing with disabled employees. Unite highlighted its role in supporting Jones and underscored the importance of fair treatment for disabled workers.
Criticism & Opposition
Legal experts and union representatives criticized Pilkington’s reliance on surveillance and the absence of updated medical assessments. They argued the company’s actions exemplify a broader issue where employers may prioritize suspicion over statutory duty to accommodate disability.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We recognise that we fell short with Mr Jones and we wish him the best for the future,” — Pilkington spokesperson
- “I was sacked through suspicion but vindicated through justice, if you know what I mean,” — Alan Jones
- “Money was never the motivation - it was always the sense of justice and making sure it never happened to anyone else.” — Alan Jones
- “This case highlights the consequences of employers making assumptions about disabled workers rather than properly understanding their condition and the medical evidence.” — Bernie Wentworth, Thompsons Solicitors
- “Alan was a loyal employee for decades and deserved support and fair treatment, not suspicion and dismissal.” — Stephen Pinder, Unite
Why It Matters
The ruling reinforces UK employment law that employers must obtain current medical evidence before taking adverse action against disabled staff. It also raises questions about the legality and ethics of covert employee surveillance, especially when used to substantiate disciplinary decisions.
What’s Next
Pilkington has pledged to implement procedural safeguards to avoid future discrimination. The case may prompt other organisations to review surveillance policies and could influence future guidance from employment regulators on handling disability-related dismissals.
