A part-time cleaner at Aberystwyth University has secured a substantial £264,442 compensation award following an employment tribunal ruling that her dismissal was both procedurally and substantively unfair, with additional findings of victimisation. The case, centred around a dispute involving a banned rice cooker in university accommodation, highlights critical issues in workplace relationships, disciplinary processes, and reference practices within UK higher education institutions.
Peak Ong, a 72-year-old Malaysian-born woman who has lived in the UK since 1989, worked 15 hours per week as a cleaning operative at the university since 2014. Her role involved maintaining student halls of residence, where certain appliances like rice cookers are prohibited due to fire safety risks. These bans are standard across UK university accommodations to mitigate the high incidence of cooking-related fires, which account for a significant portion of incidents in student halls, as noted by fire services like the London Fire Brigade.
The Escalating Conflict with Line Manager
The troubles began in June 2017 when Catherine Green became Ong's line manager. Ong raised multiple grievances alleging bullying, harassment, and age discrimination, claiming Green targeted her due to her age and sought to force her out. These included disputes over uniform requirements, safety footwear, cleaning instructions, and workload allocations, such as hand-scrubbing toilets or carrying heavy vacuums up stairs despite Ong's rotator cuff injury—a recognised disability.
Ong emailed the then-vice chancellor in 2020 about Green's 'ruthless and bullying behaviour'. Investigations by the university found no evidence of discrimination, but tensions persisted. Green, in turn, lodged complaints about Ong's 'unmanageable' conduct, describing instances of shouting, refusal to interact, and discourteousness affecting her team.
- Ong's complaints: Excessive inspections, denied holiday requests for family visits to Malaysia, rejected team leader application.
- Green's complaints: Ong's behaviour causing stress and impacting team well-being.
The Rice Cooker Incident: Catalyst or Distraction?
On March 12, 2021, a meeting addressed ongoing issues, including a rice cooker found in halls. Rice cookers are banned in UK university rooms primarily for fire safety—unattended cooking poses risks in shared, high-occupancy spaces. Standard procedure is to remove such items to secure storage rather than issue warnings.
Ong claimed Green accused her of supplying rice cookers to students, which she denied. The tribunal found no such accusation of misconduct; Green merely reminded her of the policy. Despite this, the incident fed into broader animosity, but was not the basis for dismissal. Tribunal judge Dilbaag Bansal noted the negativity seemed one-sided, primarily from Ong towards Green.
Mediation, Suspension, and Flawed Disciplinary Process
October 2021 mediation, facilitated by the university, resulted in a private agreement between Ong and Green: respectful communication, no unfounded allegations, and issue resolution via email or meetings. No clause specified disciplinary consequences for breaches, and the university was not a party.
In November 2021, Green complained again, leading to Ong's suspension for alleged gross misconduct (breaching mediation, spreading rumours). The investigation by Helen Jones was deemed defective: biased towards Green's account, no witness interviews post-Ong's denials, no evidence disclosure, and curtailed meeting. A 'Table of Incidents' was not shared in advance.
The March 2022 disciplinary hearing issued a final written warning and seven weeks for redeployment. Ong couldn't secure a role, leading to dismissal on May 22, 2022, for 'some other substantial reason'—relationship breakdown.
Victimisation Through the Reference Letter
September 2022: Ong received a conditional offer as a night care assistant from Ceredigion Council. The university's reference stated for key areas like honesty and working relationships: 'Unable to comment - the University remains in dispute with the applicant and this is a factor of the dispute.' The offer was withdrawn.
The tribunal ruled this victimisation under the Equality Act 2010, linking it to Ong's tribunal claim (protected act). Judge Bansal: 'We find this was a clear reference to the Tribunal claim... the university's conduct was irresponsible and retaliatory.' This blocked Ong's ongoing employment, projecting losses over her remaining working life.
Read the full tribunal judgment for detailed procedural analysis.
Tribunal's Verdict and Compensation
The Birmingham tribunal (Employment Judge Dilbaag Bansal) ruled dismissal unfair: procedural flaws (no appeal, flawed investigation) and substantive (no reasonable belief in misconduct). Victimisation succeeded solely on the reference; discrimination claims (age, race, disability) dismissed.
Award: £264,442, covering past/future losses. Ong mitigated reasonably, but victimisation caused long-term economic inactivity. No Polkey reduction detailed, reflecting serious failings.
Aberystwyth University's Response
The university noted the tribunal upheld most claims: 'We recognise some procedures were not applied correctly... sorry for the impact. We respect the decision and are reviewing processes.' Committed to staff support and inclusivity amid financial pressures facing UK universities.
Broader Context: Rising Tribunals in Higher Education
Unfair dismissal claims surged 72% in Q3 2025/26, per Ministry of Justice stats, with 5,481 cases. Only ~4% succeed at full hearing, but ~29% settle via ACAS. Higher ed sees frequent cases amid redundancies and restructures—e.g., Leicester academics unfairly redundant (2024), Huddersfield lecturer sacked over PhD (2021).
Median unfair dismissal award ~£13,749 (2024/25), but outliers like Ong's highlight procedural risks. Universities must adhere to ACAS Code, conduct impartial investigations, and avoid retaliatory references. For latest stats, see gov.uk tribunal quarterly.
Fire Safety Policies: Why Rice Cookers Are Banned
UK unis ban rice cookers in rooms due to fire hazards—over 1,200 cooking fires/false alarms yearly in London halls alone. Policies require PAT testing for shared kitchens; unattended use risks overheating. Aberystwyth's aligns with national guidance, emphasising prevention in high-risk student environments.
Implications for UK University Staff Rights
This case underscores ACAS compliance: fair investigations, appeal rights, neutral references. Victimisation via references can lead to uncapped losses. HR training, mediation efficacy, and disability adjustments are key. With Employment Rights Bill lowering qualification to 6 months (2027), tribunals may rise.
Stakeholders: Unions push fair processes; unis balance safety/finances. Actionable: Document everything, seek ACAS early, use union reps.
Future Outlook and Lessons for Higher Education Employers
Amid £1bn+ deficits, unis face more disputes. Robust policies, independent probes, and reference templates mitigate risks. Positive: Aberystwyth's review sets precedent. For staff, tribunals offer recourse, though protracted (33 weeks median).
Explore ACAS early conciliation for resolutions. This landmark reinforces rights in higher ed.
