Mrs Sharon Pye v Bolton Cares (A) Limited — 2023

Mrs Sharon Pye had over 30 years' continuous service and no disciplinary issues. She worked at School Hill after volunteering for a move there, but in late May 2022 she was told she would be moved again, this time to Limefield Road. The tribunal accepted her evidence that the new journey involved two bus services, one of them infrequent, and that the move would make travel materially more difficult than her existing commute.

The tribunal found there had been no consultation about the move. Mrs Ritchie told the claimant that the move was not negotiable, did not hold a face-to-face meeting, and did not properly engage with the claimant's explanation that public transport to Limefield Road was impractical. The tribunal accepted that there was an express mobility clause in the contract, but held that, in the particular circumstances, the respondent's failure to consult could amount to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. Applying the authorities cited in the judgment, including Western Excavating Ltd v Sharp, Malik v BCCI, White v Reflecting Roadstuds Ltd, Akhtar and Spafax Ltd v Harrison, the tribunal concluded that the respondent had not shown reasonable and proper cause for its approach.

The tribunal held that the claimant resigned because of the respondent's treatment and that she did not affirm the contract before resigning. It therefore found that she had been unfairly constructively dismissed. On the fairness issue, the respondent relied on conduct, said to be failure to obey a lawful management instruction, but the tribunal held that this was not made out and that, in any event, dismissal would have been outside the band of reasonable responses and contrary to s.98(4) ERA 1996.

The wrongful dismissal claim also succeeded. The tribunal found there was no repudiatory conduct by the claimant that would have justified summary dismissal, and that under her contract she was entitled to 12 weeks' notice because of her length of service. The judgment did not fix the monetary award and listed the case for a remedy hearing.