Miss C Mills v First Greater Western Limited — 2023

The Tribunal, sitting at Bristol with Employment Judge Youngs and lay members Mrs D England and Ms S Maidment, heard the Claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal on whistleblowing grounds, and whistleblowing detriment. The Tribunal found that the Claimant had not made a qualifying protected disclosure within the meaning of s.43B Employment Rights Act 1996, and accordingly the s.47B detriment and s.104 automatic unfair dismissal claims failed and were dismissed.

On the ordinary unfair dismissal claim, the Tribunal concluded that the Respondent did not have a reasonable belief that the working relationship had irreparably broken down. The Respondent had treated the Claimant's concerns as wholly historic and had not addressed her request for further training, despite her line manager having previously acknowledged that further training remained outstanding. The decision to dismiss without first offering that training was outside the range of reasonable responses, and the appeal did not remedy the procedural and substantive shortcomings. The dismissal was therefore unfair.

The Tribunal considered Polkey and contributory fault. It found that there was a realistic chance the Claimant could have been fairly dismissed in any event and reduced the compensatory award by 50%. It made no further deduction for culpable conduct. Quantum of remedy was reserved to a separate hearing, and no figures were determined in this liability judgment.