Mrs K McGuire Miss T Skitt Respondent 1: ADL Plc Respondent 2: Mrs P Jackson Respondent 3: Charlton Court Care Home Ltd v Mrs Jackson (Manager) — 2019

The tribunal was unable to identify, on the evidence before it, which of ADL Plc or Charlton Court Care Home Ltd was the correct employer, so both respondents remained in the case. It heard evidence from both claimants and from managers and carers at the home, and the dispute centred on whether concerns about residents' care amounted to protected disclosures and whether later treatment of the claimants was caused by those disclosures.

For Mrs McGuire, the tribunal accepted four protected disclosures under s.43B ERA 1996: concerns to Mrs Lewis about a resident being left unattended and waiting too long to be changed; a report about porridge being thrown on a resident; a report to Miss Metcalfe about a resident left with soiled pads for too long; and a report about resident D being taken outside in inappropriate clothing. It rejected the complaint about photographs in a resident's room, and it treated the later repetition of earlier concerns as not a separate new disclosure.

The tribunal upheld Mrs McGuire's detriment claim in respect of the conduct of Carer B, other carers, Miss Hopkinson, Mrs Jackson and Mr Taylor. It found that the home did not follow its whistleblowing and safeguarding policies, that colleagues and managers treated her as a troublemaker for raising neglect concerns, and that the protected disclosures materially influenced the adverse treatment. It also upheld the complaint about the threatening letter of 10 January 2019 and the telephone call made by Mr Taylor on Mrs Jackson's instructions, but it dismissed the complaint about late payment of final wages. It found that Miss Hopkinson's negative reference was also a detriment, and that Mrs Jackson was individually liable for the letter.

For Miss Skitt, the tribunal accepted three protected disclosures: concerns that resident P was left soiled and taken to a social event unchanged, concerns that resident B was left in bed most of the day, and repeated concerns to Miss Hopkinson about residents being left unwashed or soiled. It upheld her complaints that other carers isolated her and refused to work with her, that Miss Hopkinson failed to investigate her concerns, and that Miss Hopkinson gave her a negative reference. It dismissed the allegation that Miss Metcalfe's comment 'you're going too' was a detriment, and it dismissed the late-payment complaint for the same administrative reason it accepted in Mrs McGuire's case.

The tribunal held that both claimants resigned because the employer and colleagues left them unsupported after they raised concerns about neglect, which breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. It concluded that each resignation was an automatic unfair dismissal for making protected disclosures under s.103A ERA 1996. Remedy was not determined at this hearing, and the tribunal directed that a separate remedy hearing would be listed.