A WOMAN who lied to bosses about the reasons why she did not make visits to Barrow was not unfairly dismissed, a tribunal has ruled.

Natasha Baron was fired from her job for gross misconduct after she claimed people she was visiting to fit or remove electronic tags had warned her away due to Covid concerns.

But bosses found out the two people she was scheduled to see both said they had not been asked about Covid or objected to being visited.

She was sacked for falsifying visit reports and negligence in the performance of her duties.

The decision was taken to an employment tribunal, which ruled that her employers were fair in dismissing her from her job.

She worked for Capita as a field monitoring officer, attending the homes of criminals subject to curfew orders to install and remove electronic tags.

The tribunal heard Ms Baron had raised concerns about having to travel long distance to Barrow due to ‘significant issue’ of a lack open public toilets during the first lockdown.

She was scheduled to visit two people in Barrow on April 6 but did not do so and told her line manager the lack of available toilets in the Barrow area had been the reason.

The next day she was informed in a work conference call of toilet facilities nearby in Ulverston and in Barrow.

Shortly after she was said to have called both people and wrote in visit reports that they had told her not to visit because they were shielding.

The tribunal heard she then reported this to line manager Phil Crook, who called two people she was due to visit, who told him what she had said was not the case.

Following that she was suspended by her employer, with Mr Crook saying in a letter: “We have concerns around allegations made in relation to visit reports you submitted that if proven would amount to gross misconduct.

“As a consequence of this, as discussed, you have been suspended pending the outcome of this investigation.”

In an investigatory meeting with her employer it was found that Ms Baron had an issue with a third person.

She was said to have called them about a visit, but another call from her employer found the person did not understand English.

Judgement notes said Ms Baron had ‘misled’ manager over calls to the subject and whether a translator would be needed.

She was dismissed following a disciplinary hearing but appealed the decision, saying: “The word of two individuals of questionable morals is being taken over mine.”

In the tribunal she had also argued that she should have been paid company sick pay during a period of self-isolation rather than the lower statutory sick pay.

This claim was rejected by Judge Barker, who said ‘company sick pay is provided by an employer in circumstances set down by that employer’.