By A long-serving Marks & Spencer employee has successfully challenged his dismissal after a workplace tribunal ruled that the company’s decision to fire him was too harsh.
Mark Brennan, who had worked as a sales adviser for more than 10 years, lost his job after his staff discount credentials were used 73 times over a six-week period. According to the case, Brennan’s wife secretly copied his staff discount details from a tablet and shared them with relatives and friends without his knowledge.
The issue came to light after Marks & Spencer’s internal auditors detected unusual activity, including multiple purchases made in different locations during the same period. An investigation found that only one of the transactions had been made using Brennan’s own payment card.
The company launched a formal investigation in January 2025. Following a disciplinary process, Brennan was dismissed in February, with the decision upheld after an internal appeal.
During the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) hearing, Brennan’s union argued that he had no knowledge of the misuse until it was discovered. Once he became aware of it, he immediately stopped his wife from using the discount and offered to repay the company €464.39, the total value of the discounts obtained.
Brennan admitted that he had been careless by leaving the device containing his discount credentials accessible. However, his representatives argued that this occurred within the context of a trusted marital relationship and did not justify the loss of his career.
The WRC agreed that Brennan’s negligence contributed to the situation but ruled that Marks & Spencer’s decision to dismiss him was disproportionate. The adjudicator described the dismissal as the “nuclear option” and instead awarded Brennan €2,000 in compensation. The award was reduced by 50% because the tribunal found that his carelessness had significantly contributed to the incident.
The case highlights the importance of safeguarding employee benefits while also raising questions about how employers should balance accountability with fairness when misconduct is carried out by someone else without an employee’s knowledge.
