I think the important factor around this case was that at each stage of the Attendance Procedure, where Accidents on Duty (AOD) figured there was documented evidence that those AOD’s had been discounted, therefore it was unreasonable for the dismissing manager to allow them to enter into to his decision rationale.
The difficulty comes when managers count an AOD within a stage interview, to remedy those events members should register the accident with DWP as an industrial accident.
In addition should the manager count the AOD - then the member must use the Grievance Procedure to protest against the treatment by the manager, this will need to be followed to the final stage of the Grievance Procedure. Then should the individual end up in an Employment Tribunal it can then be clearly demonstrated that the individual never accepted the decision.
The key phrase in the Attendance Procedure is AOD are normally discounted, this can and will be used in an ET judgement. Cases have been lost on AOD’s that have been included at one of the stage interviews. Many occasions members will go into an interview without a rep, a decision is made to include, member then signs interview notes – lock the door on your way out!
. 
) said it was a brilliant idea . 
), but the point is, that we should either stand ourselves, or get someone else to stand against the bad ones. That way, we can actually DO somehing about it, instead of just moaning. It doesn't always work out, as Wranglered has already told us. But that doesn't mean that we should just give up on the CWU!