Mrs Natalie Hadden v M & C Saatchi Worldwide Limited — 2024

Mrs Natalie Hadden had worked for the respondent since 2004. After earlier contractual variations, the tribunal found that in May 2021 she and Michael Saunders orally agreed that her salary would rise to 72,500, her working week would be Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, and she would normally work from home but attend the office one day every fortnight. The written variation signed on 4 May 2021 did not record the place-of-work term, but the tribunal held that it did not reflect the whole agreement between the parties.

In May and June 2022 Michael Ferguson asked for more office attendance, first two days a week and then one day a week. The tribunal accepted that this was an attempted unilateral change to the claimant's place of work and that it breached the contractual right to work at home except for one day a fortnight. It also found, however, that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause for requiring one day a week in the office because it wanted junior team members to learn from the claimant's experience, and it did not act in a way likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's complaints about the flexible working appeal, the grievance outcome and the grievance appeal. It was not satisfied that the grievance appeal meeting had been predetermined, that the grievance response inadequately answered her questions, or that the grievance outcome letter falsely recorded an agreed final arrangement to work one day a week. Although the claimant resigned on 12 July 2023 and the tribunal accepted that the breach of contract was one reason for that resignation, it held that the breach was not fundamental and that she affirmed the contract by continuing to work and by remaining in employment for a long period after the first complaint, including while on sick leave and after requests for enhanced sick pay. The unfair dismissal claim was therefore dismissed.