London Museum cleaners win employment tribunal over unfair treatment

Cleaners at London Museum – formerly Museum of London – who claimed they were unfairly treated following the organisation’s closure of its London Wall site have won an appeal against the outsourcing company that employed them.

Six claimants brought the action against DOC Cleaning Ltd in relation to their membership of the Cleaning and Allied Independent Workers Union (CAIWU), alleging long-standing detrimental treatment by the company’s then-operations manager for the London Museum contract.

In the ruling, overseen by Judge Keogh, the operations manager was found to have warned one claimant to be careful about the “Latin” people who worked in the museum as they were members of CAIWU and “troublemakers”.

The operations manager also told a claimant, who was at that time friends with members of the union, that she was “tired of dealing with low-educated and poor people”, and another was told if he wanted to be a team leader, he had to leave the union.

One claimant was called “little and dirty” by the operations manager. The tribunal rejected suggestions that the comments were a misunderstanding, instead finding they were likely made to penalise the cleaner for being a union member.

Reduced hours

London Museum’s London Wall site closed to the public in December 2022 ahead of a move to West Smithfield in 2026, but it remained open for staff and events, leading to proposed changes affecting its cleaning staff, including the removal of weekend cleaning and reduced hours during the week.

The operations manager led the consultation process over the reduced hours alongside DOC Cleaning Ltd’s operations director, who promised to give the claimants first refusal of hours that might become available if cleaning demands increased.

The operations manager was found to have been “hostile” to claimants in response to their union membership when she told them she was “proud to be bringing in new staff following new cleaning demands from the client”.

Asked by the claimants why they had not been offered the extra hours of work, the operations manager said it was because “she wanted new people working on the site”, which was found to be “needlessly antagonistic”.

‘Obstructive’

The claimants were appealing the outcome of a previous collective grievance, noting that the former investigator was provided by a third-party HR service, Peninsula Face2Face, which DOC Cleaning employ.

Despite the claimants and their union rep setting out their grounds for appeal in a detailed letter, the senior HR manager for DOC Cleaning was found to have attempted to “obstruct and delay” the process by saying she did not understand the contents.

Her later actions were also found to be unsupportive and displayed animosity toward the union rep and the claimants.

“Employees are entitled to have their grievances dealt with properly and neutrally by their employer,” said the tribunal, adding that arguably, DOC Cleaning was “not minded to entertain or seriously investigate complaints of that nature”.

Established in 1972, DOC Cleaning was awarded a Royal Warrant of Appointment in 2008. The company’s listing on the Museums Association website says it specialises in providing a full range of cleaning and support services “at many museums and galleries throughout the South East”.

It continues: “The experience and knowledge gained during the many years of service at such prestigious locations has established our company as ‘the specialist cleaning services provider’ for museums and galleries.”

‘Promising cost reductions in publicly funded buildings’

CAIWU representative Emily Bacon told Arts Professional: “This case is a good example of why outsourcing companies can’t simply rely on ‘budgeting’ or ‘meeting client demands’ when making decisions that adversely affect their workforce.

“Following a restructure that reduced the claimants’ working hours, DOC argued that additional hours could not be offered due to client scheduling requirements and budget constraints. However, the tribunal found no evidence to support this claim and determined that the claimants should have been offered additional hours from March 2024.

“Such practices are common among outsourcing companies, which win contracts in publicly funded buildings by promising cost reductions. In reality, these ‘savings’ often result in an overworked, underpaid workforce, with many employees facing long-term stress-related sick leave. These unsustainable practices highlight the need for urgent action to better protect vulnerable workers.”

London Museum said it could not comment as it was not named as a party in the case.

DOC Cleaning has been contacted for comment.

A remedy hearing for the case will be held on 16 January 2025.