Mr B W Garrett v Tyco Fire Products Manufacturing Limited — 2020

Mr Garrett worked for Tyco Fire Products Manufacturing Limited as an Electrical Maintenance Engineer from 5 January 2009 until he resigned on 24 October 2019. The case concerned the employer's handling of annual leave after the site moved to a Panama shift pattern in March 2017, when the average working week increased from 38 to 42 hours. The claimant said he had no choice but to resign because of holiday calculations, the employer's responses to his questions, and the fact that a grievance outcome and draft handbook were sent only to him rather than to the other employees involved.

The tribunal accepted that the first year of the shift change involved inconsistencies and miscalculations in holiday booking sheets, and that the booking system was confusing. It also found that the respondent had initially made an incorrect statement about entitlement, later corrected its calculations, and from February 2018 consistently explained the entitlement as 210 hours of annual leave plus 96 hours for Bank Holidays, with three days held back for the Christmas shutdown. However, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown he lost holiday entitlement and, on the evidence, his contractual leave exceeded the minimum under the Working Time Regulations 1998. It also accepted the respondent's evidence that sending the grievance outcome and draft handbook only to the claimant was an oversight, not a deliberate attempt to mislead or hide matters.

Applying the constructive dismissal authorities it cited, including Western Excavating, Malik, Kaur and Wood, the tribunal held that none of the matters relied on, whether taken individually or cumulatively, amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract or a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. It found that the claimant resigned promptly after the relevant events, but the act of sending him the handbook and not sending the grievance outcome to all employees was not serious enough to justify resignation without notice. The claim for constructive unfair dismissal therefore failed and was dismissed.