A former telecoms worker has been awarded £5,000 after getting sacked for complaining about only getting three chicken nuggets for lunch.
The incident started when Steven Smith was left 'shocked' and 'disillusioned' at the size of the £1.99 portion he was handed in the office canteen, an employment tribunal heard.
Smith, who worked in human resources for telecoms firm Teleperformance Limited, queried why others were getting four or five nuggets.
He told the tribunal he felt 'antagonised' when he was told he could get three more if he wanted, but would need to pay extra.
Dismayed, the then 30-year-old told the dinner lady he was not a "kid" and that "if I wanted a happy meal I would go to MacDonalds " before pushing the meal back towards her and leaving the canteen.
The canteen worker said the incident left her "almost afraid to come into work", according to news agency Solent News.
She complained about his behaviour and Smith was later sacked for gross misconduct after the company found he 'acted violently'.
But a later tribunal has concluded he was unfairly dismissed as the matter was not investigated properly by bosses. Smith will now be awarded £5,181.60.
The Glasgow hearing heard how Smith worked in the HR department of the Teleperformance branch based in Airdrie, Scotland, in November 2016.
In September 2019, during a 12-hour shift Smith headed to the canteen and asked for chicken nuggets, chips, beans and cheese.
The canteen worker said: "I knew he was angry by his attitude and by his tone and language changed. He was not shouting but he was louder than he had previously been.
"I could tell by his face also. My stomach was churning at this."
She then reported the incident as the kitchen staff found his behaviour 'unreasonable'.
Smith was then brought in for a disciplinary meeting.
In the meeting, Smith said: "I just wanted to get food and get out to go back to my job.
"Due to the disillusion of what was presented before me in the white box at which the food was presented in and the sheer shock of what I was presented, I showed nothing more than dissatisfaction at which said canteen lady should have offered to raise a complaint.
"However, she did not do this and instead antagonised me by stating if I wanted more I would be charged an extra £1 for 3 chicken nuggets. Due to further shock and dissatisfaction I advised if I wanted a happy meal I would go to MacDonalds.
"I said the meal was supposed to be subsidised - not the portion size.
"It is not my fault that this canteen lady did [not] see or understand my dissatisfaction. She should have acknowledged my dissatisfaction and raised a complaint.
"However instead we are in this situation where I am being falsely accused, all because I have somehow offended this woman, which was not the intent as I showed dissatisfaction at what was presented to me, not by whom it was presented."
Smith also explained he was on medication and had been working overtime for almost 12 hours.
A second disciplinary hearing was held in October 2019 to discuss the allegation of gross misconduct in accordance with the company's policy of 'acting violently'.
Smith was then sacked because of his conduct later that month.
He later appealed this decision as he felt the canteen worker had a 'vendetta' against him.
He did not attend the appeal meeting as he did not feel well and was worried he would be 'accused of doing something he had not' if he came into the office.
The appeal hearing concluded that a 'full and thorough' investigation had taken place and Smith brought a claim for unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal/notice pay to an employment tribunal.
But the tribunal - held remotely - concluded the company's investigation 'fell out with the range of responses open to a reasonable employer'.
It noted he had a medical condition which causes his face to go red.
The panel, headed by employment judge David Hoey, concluded: "The company placed significant weight on the evidence given of Smith's demeanour and how they believed he had been angry, such as being red faced, creating anxiety.
"Smith had advised the investigator he had health issues and it was possible his complexion (and demeanour) could in some way have been connected to his health (or indeed hunger or exasperation) rather than in a way that was adverse as was being suggested."
"The sarcastic remark about a happy meal is not by itself abusive nor rude. For some the comment may have been positive depending upon their food preferences. For others it may have been negative.
"The investigation that was carried out was one that no employer acting fairly and reasonably on the facts of this case would have carried out."
Smith will be awarded £840 for unfair dismissal, £3,333.60 as compensation and £1,008 for notice pay/wrongful dismissal.
Teleperformance has been approached for comment.
