The managing director at the tech firm was searching for a spreadsheet when he discovered the finance administrator’s private WhatsApp chats.

An employment tribunal noted members of staff at the firm had previously been asked to download their “personal WhatsApp accounts” onto their work computers.

In one exchange of messages, Ms Coleman said she was listening to a book which had “just got steamy” to which a colleague she was speaking with replied “haha oh ur big dragon porn”.

The managing director, Dr Siviter, discovered “a number of messages” that “concerned” him, including one whereby Ms Coleman said she was going to “slam” a colleague’s face “against his desk if he keeps it up”, the employment tribunal report states.

The messages were exchanged outside of working hours and had been sent after the colleague Ms Coleman was referring to had “repeatedly slamming a door in the office which had made windows shake”.

Dr Siviter understood the messages to be a “threat” as he believed Ms Coleman to be a trained military cadet instructor.

|

PA

Ms Coleman received a letter from the company on June 3, 2025 to say she had been suspended ahead of a disciplinary hearing.

The letter made reference to an “unacceptable use of language” and “inappropriate use of company equipment during working hours”.

A disciplinary hearing was held soon after at which Ms Coleman’s union representative was told he would not be allowed to represent her.

Ms Coleman felt a decision had “already been made” and drafted her resignation letter the evening before the hearing, which she then gave to her employer after it took place.

An employment tribunal held in Glasgow at the end of last year found Ms Coleman had been unfairly dismissed.

Judge D Hoey concluded there was “no fair basis” to conclude the audiobook was connected with pornographic material, noting staff were permitted to listen to audiobooks at work.

The judge noted: “The difficulty he had was that while he had a legitimate purpose in looking for work related material, that was not a justification for his decision to read obviously personal messages the claimant had sent to her friend and colleague.

“Dr Siviter appeared to find the comments ‘offensive and shocking’ which lacked credibility when properly viewed in context.

“There was no legitimate basis for Dr Siviter trawling through pages of personal WhatsApp messages given the purpose in accessing the claimant’s machine was to identify a work related file.”

Mr Hoey concluded Ms Coleman had resigned because she considered the company would “not give her a fair hearing”.

Ms Coleman won a total of £8,009 following the outcome of the employment tribunal.