What did Rockstar accuse the first claimant of at the tribunal?

Rockstar's barrister said posting two internal emails about Slack guidelines in the union Discord, which had around 350 members including former employees, was 'an egregious act of gross misconduct'. The claimant said the emails had already gone to all staff. The tribunal has made no finding.

What is the 'watch list' claim?

A dismissed worker told the tribunal they believed a 2023 remote-working petition, signed by around 150 staff, formed the basis of a watch list. It is the claimant's belief; no such list has been produced in reported evidence.

When will the Rockstar tribunal reach a decision?

The hearing is listed to 16 October 2026. The written judgment usually follows weeks or months later and will be published on the UK government's tribunal decisions service.

Rockstar Tribunal: First Claimant Cross-Examined Over Discord Emails

The opening arguments are over and the evidence has started. The first claimant to give evidence spent two days in the witness box, and the exchange showed exactly where Rockstar intends to fight: not over whether there was a union, but over what was posted in its Discord.

This is testimony and cross-examination, not a ruling. A witness saying something under oath does not make it true, and a barrister putting something to a witness does not make it proven. The tribunal has made no findings. Both accounts are reported as what they are.

Friday 11 September: the claimant's account

Dayne Oram, one of the workers dismissed on 30 October 2025, was the first claimant to give evidence before Employment Judge Lucy Wiseman in Glasgow.

The 2023 petition. Oram told the tribunal they signed a petition about remote working in spring 2023 alongside around 150 colleagues, and said: “I believe this forms the basis of a watch list of people to keep an eye on for activities.” That is the claimant's belief; no document establishing a watch list has been reported.
Moderating the Discord. Asked about the tone of the union server, Oram accepted: “I do agree there were times it could get a bit out of hand, yes.” Oram said posts aimed at specific individuals were removed, while general criticism of the company was left up.

Monday 14 September: Rockstar's cross-examination

Rockstar's barrister, Thomas Cordrey, focused on two internal emails from a Rockstar vice president about guidelines for the company's Slack channels, which were posted in the union Discord.

The accusation. “Your breach of this policy was an egregious act of gross misconduct,” Cordrey told the witness.
Who could see them. Rockstar says the server had around 350 members, including about ten people who no longer worked at the company.
The security argument. Cordrey argued that internal emails are exactly what an attacker wants: “If you were a hacker who wanted to trick Rockstar employees, it would be gold dust to have two emails…” He also said the Discord contained references to unannounced Grand Theft Auto VI features, information he argued could affect Take-Two's share price.
Oram's answer. The emails had already been sent to all staff; Oram said they did not know some members had left the company, and that it was “difficult” to balance the company's information policy with employees' right to organise, describing the sharing as necessary for union activity.

Why this matters for the case

In week one, both sides agreed Rockstar had been receiving information from inside the Discord. The first cross-examination shows Rockstar's strategy: to make the case about specific breaches of confidentiality by specific people, rather than about the union as a whole. The claimants' strategy is the reverse: to show that the confidentiality policy was the pretext and the union was the target.

Where the two sides stood after the first claimant's evidence.
Question	Claimant	Rockstar
Were the emails confidential?	They went to all staff already.	Posting them outside the company was gross misconduct.
Who was in the Discord?	Did not know some members had left Rockstar.	About 350 members, including about ten ex-employees.
Was the server moderated?	Personal attacks removed; general criticism kept.	Conduct was disparaging of managers and leadership.
Why were people dismissed?	Union activity, tracked since a 2023 petition.	Sharing confidential information, not union membership.

How many claimants?

Press Association coverage of this week's hearing says 23 of the 34 people dismissed are pursuing claims. The IWGB and earlier reporting have used 31. We reported 31 on 11 and 12 September. We do not know which figure is current — claims can be withdrawn or settled before a hearing — so we are flagging both rather than quietly changing the number.

What Rockstar says

Rockstar's position, restated this week, is unchanged: individuals in the UK and Canada “were dismissed for gross misconduct following the sharing of confidential company information, not because of alleged trade union membership or activity.”

What happens next

The hearing is listed to 16 October 2026. More claimants and Rockstar's own witnesses are still to give evidence, and the judgment will almost certainly come after GTA VI launches on 19 November. We have found no substantial reporting of hearing days after 14 September at the time of writing; when there is, it goes in the news log. Background: the full union dispute and what each side argued in week one.

The First Claimant Takes the Stand: a ‘Watch List’, Two Emails and ‘Gold Dust’