Mrs Joanne Thompson v 2020 Homes Limited — 2019

Mrs Joanne Thompson worked for 2020 Homes Limited as a finance apprentice from 10 October 2016 until her resignation took effect on 19 October 2018. The tribunal found that, after she completed her Level 3 AAT examinations, there was no binding agreement requiring the respondent to pay further course fees or to increase her salary. It also found that the claimant and a younger colleague, Subrina Hussain, were both being paid the statutory national minimum wage for their respective ages, so the claimant was not treated less favourably because of age.

The age discrimination complaint failed because the tribunal accepted that the claimant’s concern was that she was not being given a pay rise, but found that this did not amount to less favourable treatment because of age within section 13 of the Equality Act 2010. The tribunal found that the claimant’s comparator was being paid less, not more, and that the respondent had not treated the claimant differently because she was older.

The disability discrimination complaint also failed. The tribunal accepted that the claimant’s back condition was a disability, but found that the discussion with Mr Mushtaq about the Manager of Supported Housing role was an enquiry about interest, not a formal offer. It found that the claimant indicated she did not consider the role suitable for her, that her lack of interest was not solely because of disability, and that the role was then offered to Rebecca Vaughan for reasons unconnected with the claimant’s disability.

The constructive dismissal claim succeeded. The tribunal found that, after a meeting on 23 August 2018 in which Mr Khaliq said the claimant was not worth the hourly rate she was being paid, he later told her on 30 August 2018 that her employment was to be terminated and that they should part ways. It rejected the respondent’s account that he had merely said he intended to give notice. The tribunal held that this conduct, taken together with the earlier pay-rise discussion and the later retraction of the dismissal only after intervention by the managing director, amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.

Applying the constructive dismissal authorities it cited, including Western Excavating, Woods, Kaur and Waltham Forest v Omilaju, the tribunal found that the claimant resigned in response to that breach. It rejected the argument that she had affirmed the contract by working her notice or by seeking alternative employment after being told she was to be dismissed. The tribunal awarded a basic award of £587.26 and a compensatory award of £400.00, making a total award of £987.26.