Calling Boss a Dhead is OK

[Mr Pointy]

Common sense at last:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/sep/04/call...

[gruffalo]

Mr Pointy said:

Common sense at last:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/sep/04/call...

Link not working.

If you are expressing an opinion then you are entitled to air an opinion.

There may be repercussions.

[cml24]

I'd say this specific case went the way I'd hope/expect it to (I only have the details in the article to make judgement on).

The person that was let go had no previous warnings, and called two of her superiors dheads whilst she was concerned she was about to be let go and was crying so clearly quite emotional.

The boss appears to have replied with worse language and instantly fired her.

If there were other reasons to let her go, then follow process, but a minor insult in the heat of the moment isn't a reasonable reason.

[InitialDave]

cml24 said:

The person that was let go had no previous warnings, and called two of her superiors dheads whilst she was concerned she was about to be let go and was crying so clearly quite emotional.

The boss appears to have replied with worse language and instantly fired her.

Sounds like she wasn't wrong.

[dontlookdown]

InitialDave said:

cml24 said:

The person that was let go had no previous warnings, and called two of her superiors dheads whilst she was concerned she was about to be let go and was crying so clearly quite emotional.

The boss appears to have replied with worse language and instantly fired her.

Sounds like she wasn't wrong.

Yup. Prob less of an insult and more a statement of fact, in this case.

[otolith]

[carl_w]

Bit like the old joke:
Employee: "If I told you you were a , would you fire me?"
Boss: "Of course"
Employee: "What if I thought you were a ?"
Boss: "Well I couldn't fire you for thinking something"
Employee: "In that case, I think you're a "

[bigandclever]

gruffalo said:

Mr Pointy said:

Common sense at last:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/sep/04/call...

Link not working.

PH censoring "dhead" in the URL, innit. Have a tinyurl instead .. https://tinyurl.com/373m7eew

[InitialDave]

"Scaffolding and brickwork company".

FFS. This is not a sector to work in if you're the type to clutch your pearls about a certain level of coarseness in people's communication.

[Countdown]

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

[otolith]

Countdown said:

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

Have you read the account in the article? Nobody comes out of it looking very professional.

[Leptons]

My old Boss called me a once. On reflection he was probably right but the feeling was mutual. Didn’t cry about it though.

[Countdown]

otolith said:

Countdown said:

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

Have you read the account in the article? Nobody comes out of it looking very professional.

What have I missed?

I agree that neither party comes out of it looking professional but I can understand why the boss might lose their cool when a member of staff (about whom they have performance concerns) swears at them.

[Evanivitch]

Countdown said:

otolith said:

Countdown said:

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

Have you read the account in the article? Nobody comes out of it looking very professional.

What have I missed?

I agree that neither party comes out of it looking professional but I can understand why the boss might lose their cool when a member of staff (about whom they have performance concerns) swears at them.

The issue wasn't the boss swearing, it was the summary dismissal in response. This isn't unusual when a small business doesn't have a decent HR function, and I can only imagine complete stubbornness is why this got to tribunal.

[otolith]

Countdown said:

otolith said:

Countdown said:

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

Have you read the account in the article? Nobody comes out of it looking very professional.

What have I missed?

I agree that neither party comes out of it looking professional but I can understand why the boss might lose their cool when a member of staff (about whom they have performance concerns) swears at them.

It just sounds like the situation was terribly managed and got out of hand, she blurted something stupid, he escalated. I wouldn't take kindly to someone calling me and the other directors "dheads", but I'd be more disappointed with myself at allowing the conversation to reach that point and then losing my cool. Her contract covered this situation, and it didn't cover firing her for a first offence.

article said:

The hearing was told that under the terms of her contract, she could be fired for “the provocative use of insulting or abusive language”.

However, this required she be given a prior warning. Only more serious breaches such as “threatening and intimidating language” would be gross misconduct and warrant summary dismissal.

They might have had more of a leg to stand on if the contract hadn't mentioned that situation at all.

[JagLover]

otolith said:

Countdown said:

otolith said:

Countdown said:

I think this is another bonkers decision by an ET.

Your boss may well be a dhead. Calling him or her a dhead is never acceptable behaviour if you want to keep your job. I'm not sure why it wasn't regarded as gross misconduct tbh.

Have you read the account in the article? Nobody comes out of it looking very professional.

What have I missed?

I agree that neither party comes out of it looking professional but I can understand why the boss might lose their cool when a member of staff (about whom they have performance concerns) swears at them.

It just sounds like the situation was terribly managed and got out of hand, she blurted something stupid, he escalated. I wouldn't take kindly to someone calling me and the other directors "dheads", but I'd be more disappointed with myself at allowing the conversation to reach that point and then losing my cool. Her contract covered this situation, and it didn't cover firing her for a first offence.

article said:

The hearing was told that under the terms of her contract, she could be fired for “the provocative use of insulting or abusive language”.

However, this required she be given a prior warning. Only more serious breaches such as “threatening and intimidating language” would be gross misconduct and warrant summary dismissal.

They might have had more of a leg to stand on if the contract hadn't mentioned that situation at all.

This

The ET tribunal ruling was you had to follow correct procedure, not that it is fine for employees to describe their boss in these terms.

Sounds like a sensible decision.

[DeejRC]

So it’s basically that you can call your boss a d1ckhead once, but not twice.

[IroningMan]

DeejRC said:

So it’s basically that you can call your boss a d1ckhead once, but not twice.

No, it’s basically that you and your employer should adhere to the terms of the contract between you.

[DeejRC]

IroningMan said:

DeejRC said:

So it’s basically that you can call your boss a d1ckhead once, but not twice.

No, it’s basically that you and your employer should adhere to the terms of the contract between you.

You have negotiated yourself a good contract if you can do it 3 times…

[Trevor555]

Seems one sided.

If the boss had caller her a dickkopf, I'm sure she could have gone for constructive dissmissal.

But she can call boss one, and boss has to suck it up?