Mr D Bunting, Counsel The v Respondent — 2021

The claimant, Mr J Armitage, brought claims for constructive unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal after resigning on 31 January 2020. The tribunal found that the employment relationship had been a longstanding one and that the claimant was a credible witness overall, although his evidence on some matters was unclear or conflicting. The tribunal also noted that the respondent did not call all relevant witnesses, including Mr John Adey and Mr Simon Keeping, to address the events of 9 December 2019 and 13 December 2019.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's reliance on the earlier disputes with Mr Chris Mason as a basis for constructive dismissal. It found that complaints in 2018 and the grievance meeting on 30 June 2018 had been dealt with by the respondent, and that the later incident on 31 October 2019 was also handled promptly, with Mr Mason apologising and receiving a verbal warning. The tribunal therefore concluded that the claimant had not shown a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence in relation to those matters.

By contrast, the tribunal found that Mr John Adey breached trust and confidence on 9 December 2019 by telling the claimant that he was always in the "fucking toilet" and telling him to "fuck off" on at least two occasions. It also found that the claimant was upset but did not act inappropriately, and that this conduct caused him to leave work early. The tribunal further found that the claimant was summarily dismissed on 10 December 2019 without prior warning, investigation, or disciplinary process, despite the Facebook messages not containing threats of physical violence, and that the dismissal was later rescinded after the claimant disclosed mental health issues at the meeting on 13 December 2019.

The tribunal then found further breaches on 2 January 2020 when Mr Jonathan Adey refused to amend the 13 December 2019 letter to reflect reinstatement rather than re-employment, and when Mr Simon Keeping told the claimant that he had caused a rift between managers and shop floor workers. It was not satisfied that the claimant proved the alleged failure to contact his GP, or that the 13 December 2019 meeting had in fact been recorded, but those points did not prevent the tribunal finding that the other breaches were an effective cause of the resignation. The tribunal held that the claimant did not affirm the contract by continuing to work until 31 January 2020, and that the respondent had not established a fair reason under section 98(1)/(2) ERA 1996. It therefore upheld the unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal also upheld wrongful dismissal, holding that the claimant was entitled to terminate for notice purposes.

On remedy-related issues, the tribunal decided that no reduction under section 123(1) ERA 1996 was appropriate, but that any compensatory award should be increased by 20% under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 because the respondent failed to address the claimant's grievance properly. It also found contributory conduct based on the claimant's Facebook messages and reduced any basic and compensatory award by 20% under sections 122(2) and 123(6) ERA 1996. No final monetary figure appears in the judgment, so the award amounts are not extractable from this decision alone.