In person v Halfords Autocentres Ltd — 2020

At a telephone hearing on 5 June 2020, Employment Judge Little struck out Mr Ryan's claim against Halfords Autocentres Limited. The ET1 had not identified a specific statutory claim; it ticked only the 'another type of claim' box and said the claim was about 'bullying and forced to quit'. The attached details were said to replicate a grievance raised after Mr Ryan resigned on 10 January 2020, and the tribunal understood the thrust of the case to be that he had been badly treated by colleagues and higher management and had resigned as a result.

The tribunal found that Mr Ryan was not alleging that the bullying was because of any protected characteristic, so the matter was not an Equality Act discrimination claim. The respondent pointed out that he had been employed for just under 10 months and therefore did not have the two years' continuous service ordinarily required to bring an unfair dismissal complaint. An earlier letter from Employment Judge Lancaster had also explained that bullying by itself did not give rise to a tribunal claim and had invited Mr Ryan to explain why the claim should not be struck out.

Mr Ryan replied that he was still struggling with what had happened and said it was not just bullying because he had been pushed to the point where he wanted to end his life. At the hearing, the tribunal repeated that it was not in a position to comment on the rights or wrongs of the employment relationship and that Parliament had generally provided a two-year service requirement for unfair dismissal rights. The tribunal concluded that it did not have the power to deal with the complaint and struck the claim out. The judge also observed that it might have been better if the respondent had replied to the grievance, but that did not change the jurisdictional outcome.