The dismissal of a London North Eastern Railway employee over a serious food hygiene breach has drawn attention to standards of conduct expected in customer service roles, particularly in environments where public health and trust are central. The case concerns Peter Duffy, a train worker who was found to have retrieved discarded sausage rolls from a bin, reheated them, and allowed them to be served to first-class passengers on an LNER service.
The incident, which occurred in May 2023 on a train departing York, ultimately led to Mr Duffy’s dismissal for gross misconduct and the rejection of his subsequent unfair dismissal and discrimination claims by an employment tribunal. The tribunal’s findings underline the importance placed on food safety, accountability, and professional judgment within the rail industry, regardless of intent or personal circumstances cited by employees.
The Incident and Internal Investigation
The events that led to Peter Duffy’s dismissal unfolded during a routine LNER service on May 7, 2023. Mr Duffy and a fellow crew member were working in the onboard kitchen area when two first-class passengers requested sausage rolls. According to evidence later considered by the tribunal, another crew member had earlier been told that no sausage rolls were available because they had been thrown away. This statement appeared consistent with the state of the kitchen at the time, as the food was understood to have been disposed of.
Concerns were raised when a member of staff reported overhearing laughter coming from the kitchen area shortly before food service resumed. The same staff member later noticed that the kitchen bin was empty when they went to dispose of their own rubbish, despite being told earlier that the sausage rolls had already been discarded. Shortly after this observation, sausage rolls were served to first-class passengers, prompting suspicion about their source.
The matter was escalated internally, and LNER reviewed CCTV footage from the train. According to the tribunal’s findings, the footage appeared to show food items being removed from a bin by Mr Duffy in the presence of a colleague. The footage suggested that the items were then plated and reheated before being served to customers by another member of staff. Both Mr Duffy and his colleague were suspended while the company conducted an investigation into the alleged breach of food hygiene standards.
Read : Thousands in Hong Kong Still Live in Coffin Homes Due to Lack of Space: Watch
During an investigatory meeting held on May 17, 2023, Mr Duffy acknowledged taking the sausage rolls but argued that they were still wrapped in foil and that he had acted out of a desire to go “over and beyond for the customer.” He stated that the train had run out of food options for first-class passengers and that he had made a poor judgment call in an attempt to provide service rather than disappoint customers. Despite these explanations, the seriousness of the alleged conduct prompted LNER to treat the matter as potential gross misconduct.
Tribunal Findings and Rejection of Claims
Following his dismissal in July 2023, Mr Duffy brought claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination, which were heard by an employment tribunal in Newcastle in August 2025. He argued that his actions should be viewed in the context of his mental health, stating that he suffered from anxiety and depression, was taking medication, and had been under significant stress at work at the time of the incident. A union representative also suggested during proceedings that Mr Duffy had experienced transient global amnesia on the day in question, a condition involving a temporary disruption of short-term memory.
Read : Harina Train Collides with Stranded Truck at Semarang Railway Crossing in Indonesia
The tribunal examined these arguments in detail but ultimately rejected them. In its written reasons, published later, the tribunal judge concluded that LNER had acted reasonably in dismissing Mr Duffy for gross misconduct. The judge accepted that the CCTV evidence supported the conclusion that food retrieved from a bin had been reheated and served to passengers, representing a clear breach of food hygiene standards.
The tribunal also considered the reliability of witness testimony. Mr Duffy’s colleague denied seeing him retrieve food from the bin and suggested that laughter heard in the kitchen was unrelated to the incident. However, the tribunal found this account unreliable and likely to be self-serving, particularly when weighed against the CCTV footage and the consistency of other staff members’ concerns.
On the issue of disability discrimination, the tribunal concluded that Mr Duffy’s dismissal was not connected to his mental health conditions. The judge found no evidence that the actions leading to his dismissal arose as a consequence of any disability. Instead, the tribunal held that the dismissal was based squarely on the seriousness of the misconduct itself and the potential risk to passenger health and the company’s reputation. As a result, both the unfair dismissal and discrimination claims were dismissed in full.
Food Hygiene, Professional Responsibility, and Wider Implications
The case has highlighted broader issues around food hygiene and professional responsibility in customer-facing roles within the transport sector. Rail operators, particularly those providing catering services, are subject to strict standards designed to protect passenger health. Serving food that has been disposed of, regardless of packaging or perceived cleanliness, represents a fundamental breach of those standards.
The tribunal’s decision underscores that intent, while relevant, does not outweigh the objective seriousness of conduct where public safety is concerned. Mr Duffy repeatedly stated that he was motivated by a desire to provide good customer service and avoid disappointing first-class passengers. However, the tribunal accepted LNER’s position that such intentions could not justify actions that exposed passengers to potential health risks.
The ruling also reinforces the principle that employers are entitled to rely on CCTV evidence and contemporaneous reports when assessing alleged misconduct. In this case, the combination of staff observations, inconsistencies in explanations, and video footage provided a sufficient evidential basis for dismissal. The tribunal was clear that LNER followed a reasonable process, including suspension, investigation, and a formal disciplinary outcome, before deciding to dismiss Mr Duffy.
From an employment law perspective, the case serves as a reminder that claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination require a clear causal link between the alleged disability and the conduct in question. While tribunals are obliged to consider the impact of mental health conditions on employee behavior, they must also balance this against the employer’s duty to maintain safe and lawful operations. The judge’s finding that the misconduct did not arise as a consequence of Mr Duffy’s disability was central to the dismissal of his claims.
For the rail industry and similar service sectors, the outcome reinforces the importance of training, supervision, and clear boundaries around customer service. Going “over and beyond” for customers cannot involve compromising safety or hygiene standards, even under pressure or in situations where resources are limited. The case also illustrates the reputational risks companies face when such standards are breached and why employers are likely to take a firm stance in response.
Ultimately, the tribunal’s ruling confirms that LNER’s decision to dismiss Peter Duffy was within the range of reasonable responses open to an employer faced with a serious breach of food hygiene. The judgment closes a case that has drawn public attention not only for the unusual nature of the incident but also for the clear message it sends about accountability, professional judgment, and the limits of discretion in customer service roles.