Mr M Haynes v Sky UK Limited Heard by CVP at Sheffield — 2020

Mr Haynes worked for Sky UK Limited from 1 April 2009 and later worked at the Doncaster Frenchgate site. The tribunal accepted that Mr Reynolds behaved as the claimant alleged, including the use of foul and abusive language and public criticism of the claimant and others, and it accepted that the relevant disability for the Equality Act claims was anxiety and depression. It also accepted that Mr Stimpson had reassured the claimant in 2017 that he would no longer have to work under Mr Reynolds.

On dismissal, the tribunal held that Mr Reynolds' earlier conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, but it did not find that the claimant resigned in response to that conduct alone. The claimant had remained in employment until October 2019, so he had affirmed the contract in relation to those earlier matters. The successful constructive dismissal findings instead rested on later continuing breaches from March 2019 onward, particularly the failure to act on occupational health advice and the failure to engage properly with reasonable adjustments and the Doncaster redundancy situation.

The tribunal found that occupational health reports in March and April 2019 recommended discussion with the claimant and possible adjustments or redeployment, but the respondent did not effectively act on them. It also found that a July 2019 error on the occupational health referral form was a significant mistake and created a confidentiality issue, although that episode was not the basis on which the claimant ultimately resigned. The tribunal therefore upheld the constructive wrongful dismissal claim and the constructive unfair dismissal claim, but it did not quantify any compensation in this judgment because the case was listed for a remedy hearing.

On the section 15 EqA claim, the tribunal found that the respondent treated the claimant unfavourably when it left him out of the consultation about the Doncaster closure until 16 July 2019, failed to carry out a full and meaningful consultation, and failed to notify him when the store closed on 3 September 2019. It rejected the justification defence. The tribunal also held that the complaints about Mr Mackenzie Crooks telling the claimant that his grievance was low priority, acting with a hostile tone, delaying matters, or limiting the scope of the grievance investigation were not made out.

On reasonable adjustments, the tribunal held that the claimant was placed at a substantial disadvantage by the requirement to work for or under Mr Reynolds and by the respondent's 30-mile redeployment approach. It found that placing him at Meadowhall or Crystal Peaks under a different line manager was practicable and would have had a prospect of reducing the disadvantage, but the respondent did not make effective adjustments. The tribunal held that the disability discrimination complaints were in time because the relevant conduct was continuing, and in any event it would have extended time on a just and equitable basis.