Mrs D Pinterova v Clean and Tidy Domestic and Commercial Cleaning Ltd — 2024

The claimant worked for the respondent from 8 March 2008 and took adoption leave from 1 June 2022. After the company was sold to Lightowler in November 2022, Miss Westerdale handled the claimant's return-to-work request. The tribunal accepted that Miss Westerdale told the claimant on 27 April 2023 that her flexible working request had been refused before any proper discussion, and later emailed on 9 May 2023 as if no decision had been made. On 23 May 2023 she confirmed the refusal and offered either the claimant's original hours or a part-time cleaning role. The tribunal found that the lack of consultation and the attempt to disguise the earlier decision were material features of the claimant's resignation on 31 May 2023, so the claim of unfair constructive dismissal succeeded.

The tribunal rejected the adoption leave and disability-based complaints. It found that the detriments alleged to arise from adoption leave failed because Miss Westerdale's actions were driven by inexperience with flexible working requests, failure to gather full information, and an attempt to cover her tracks, not because the claimant had taken adoption leave. The direct disability discrimination claim also failed: although the respondent accepted that the claimant was disabled, there was no evidence that the refusal of the flexible working request or the later communications were made because of disability, and Miss Westerdale only learned of the hand impairment after the refusal had already been communicated.

The flexible working complaint was dismissed as out of time. The tribunal identified 23 May 2023 as the last date on which the respondent could be said to have failed to deal with the request reasonably, and held that the complaint should have been presented by 25 August 2023 after taking account of ACAS early conciliation; it was not raised until 6 September 2023, and it was reasonably practicable to include it in the original claim. The claim for notice pay also failed because the tribunal found no recoverable loss from the absence of notice. The claimant had 15 complete years' service and was aged 38, so the basic award was 15 weeks' pay at £513.30, namely £7,699.50. The compensatory award was £7,348.68, based on a 70% chance that a properly handled flexible working request would have been granted, together with losses for earnings, pension contributions, job-search and set-up expenses, and loss of statutory rights. The total award for unfair dismissal was £15,048.18.