Mr D Coleman (The claimant’s husband) For the v Respondent — 2024

The claimant, a bar person at The Post Mill, brought a single constructive unfair dismissal claim arising from disciplinary action over events on 13 and 14 July 2023. The respondent alleged rude and aggressive behaviour towards customers, participation in open the box, and bullying or micromanaging of staff. The tribunal accepted that there had been earlier concerns about the claimant's demeanour and that the respondent had some genuine cause to address her interactions with customers, colleagues, and participation in the cash-prize games, but it found that the way the matter was handled was not justified.

The tribunal found that the initial disciplinary invite did not include the disciplinary policy or witness statements, and that the claimant was not given a proper written account of the customer complaints from 13 July. It also found that no separate investigation interview was carried out despite the policy, and that the claimant was not given a fair opportunity to test the evidence. The claimant asked to be accompanied by her husband, Mr Coleman, who was a work colleague and director of the respondent; the tribunal found the refusal was based on discomfort about his board role rather than any proper reason under the policy. The outcome and appeal also introduced new matters that had not previously been put to her, including that she had allowed her husband to interfere with the process and that she had stomped off when refused a drink. The appeal upheld some points but reduced the sanction from a final written warning to a written warning.

Applying the implied term of trust and confidence and the section 98 unfair dismissal test, the tribunal held that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to address the underlying concerns but not to label the matter gross misconduct and proceed in a way it considered intended to shock the claimant. It found that the cumulative conduct of the disciplinary process amounted to a repudiatory breach, that the claimant resigned in response to that breach, and that she was therefore constructively dismissed and unfairly dismissed. On remedy, the tribunal limited loss to 16 weeks, reduced both the basic and compensatory awards by 50% for contributory conduct, rejected injury to feelings as unavailable in an unfair dismissal claim, and awarded a basic award of £825.75, a compensatory award of £1,130, and total compensation of £1,955.75.