Mr J Cooke v UK Direct Business Solutions Ltd — 2021

Mr Cooke was employed by UK Direct Business Solutions Limited from 6 August 2018 until he resigned with immediate effect on 28 August 2020. The case concerned his complaint that the respondent’s conduct between May and August 2020, said to involve refusal to provide childcare-related time off and flexibility, entitled him to resign and treat himself as constructively dismissed under s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996.

The tribunal found that the respondent repeatedly accommodated the claimant’s childcare difficulties. It accepted that he was moved off the home-working core team and placed on furlough in April 2020, that parental leave was approved immediately in May 2020, that his request for earlier and later working hours was initially accommodated, and that the respondent altered its annual leave system so he could take leave by the hour. It also found that the respondent later ended the special flexible arrangements because conditions had improved, which was a reasonable decision in the circumstances.

The tribunal rejected the claimant’s case that the respondent was trying to get rid of him or that there was a plan to ignore government guidance and pressure him out. It found no basis for the allegation that Mr Moslemi suggested he should take part in “beef of the week” to get time off, and it treated the alleged 24 June discussion about gross misconduct as irrelevant to the resignation because the claimant was unaware of it at the time. The tribunal also noted that on 30 July the claimant told Mrs Charlton that childcare was “sorted” and that he did not need the time off, which meant she had no reason to know he still needed the four hours in August.

The final message from Mrs Charlton on 28 August 2020, asking whether Naomi could come back from work so the claimant could get in for lunchtime, was found to be a reasonable enquiry rather than a demand. Applying Western Excavating, Woods, Malik, Omilaju, Kaur and Williams, the tribunal held that this act did not itself amount to a repudiatory breach and did not form part of a cumulative course of conduct that destroyed trust and confidence. The unfair dismissal complaint was therefore dismissed.