Mr R Longosz v Crussh Retail Limited — 2024

Mr Longosz had been an area manager with responsibility for multiple stores, but the respondent's business had shrunk after the acquisition and restructuring described in the reasons. In June and July 2023 Mr Carter and Mr Mustapha discussed changes with him, asked for a list of his duties, and then offered him a new retail stores manager role with a salary of 43,500. The claimant said the offer was a demotion and sought time to consider it; the tribunal preferred the respondent's evidence that the business needed to adapt to a smaller store estate.

The tribunal found that the area manager role no longer existed and that the retail stores manager role was materially different from the store manager role ultimately imposed on him. It held that the move to store manager was a retrograde step and a fundamental breach of contract, and that the claimant's delay in responding did not amount to acceptance of the variation. When the claimant was placed in the Bankside store and resigned on 3 December 2023, the tribunal held that constructive unfair dismissal was made out.

On redundancy, the tribunal found that the dismissal came about because the claimant's role had become redundant within section 139(1)(b) ERA 1996, because fewer employees were needed to do the work he had been doing. It found the claimant was effectively redundant by 20 October 2023 and that there was no equivalent or alternative role available at that point. The notice-pay/breach-of-contract complaint was dismissed because the claimant had received the six weeks' notice to which his contract entitled him, and the tribunal also found that the respondent had not unreasonably failed to comply with the ACAS Code so there would be no uplift. The hearing remained liability only and remedy was left for a later hearing.