Mr John Gillies v Network Rail Infrastructure Limited — 2019

The claimant applied for the respondent's Industry Special Voluntary Severance Scheme and later signed the agreement. The tribunal found that he had several weeks to consider his position, that the signed agreement objectively showed an intention to enter a binding mutual termination agreement, and that the respondent was entitled under the scheme rules to refuse his request to withdraw after signature. It therefore found there was no dismissal and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.

On the age discrimination allegations, the tribunal found that some pleaded conduct occurred, including a 7 September 2021 discussion in which the claimant's age and the scheme were mentioned, the 10 September 2021 'partially achieved' rating, the review panel form comments, and the refusal to allow withdrawal from the scheme. It rejected the allegation that Mr Kari had referred to recruiting 'more fresh young talent' or private-sector workloads, and found that the performance rating reflected a genuine assessment of performance rather than pressure to apply for the scheme or treatment because of age.

The tribunal found that the 7 September 2021 conversation was related to age and unwanted, but that it was a business-as-usual discussion about career plans and did not have the purpose or effect of violating dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. It also found no sufficient link between age and the review panel comments or the refusal to allow withdrawal, and accepted the respondent's evidence that the refusal was based on the scheme rules.

For victimisation, the tribunal accepted that the claimant's 2019 grievance appeal contained a protected act concerning age discrimination. It found, however, that the relevant decision-maker for the review panel comments was not aware of that grievance, and that the pleaded detriments were not because of the protected act. All claims were dismissed.