Miss L M Smith v Oakland International — 2020

Miss L M Smith resigned with effect from 28 June 2019 and brought claims for constructive unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages. The wages issue was resolved during the hearing when the amount complained of was paid, after which the claimant withdrew that claim. The tribunal therefore only determined the constructive dismissal complaint on its merits.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's account of repeated insults and derogatory comments by Mr Oakland. It found the remarks about hair, physique and related workplace banter were made and received in a joking, light-hearted atmosphere, without malice and without being treated by the claimant as serious enough to pursue at the time. It also found her evidence inconsistent and vague, noted that she did not raise a grievance and did not mention the complaints in her resignation letter.

The tribunal further found that none of the claimant's duties as Office Manager had actually been removed, that any suggestion her role would disappear was based on conjecture from documents she saw, and that Mr Oakland was under no obligation to accept her advice. It rejected the suggestion that a future reduction in role had been indicated. On the final complaint, it held that the extra work caused by Ms Gerrard's departure was temporary, that recruitment of a replacement was in train, and that the claimant's contract allowed working hours to vary according to the needs of the business.

Applying the constructive dismissal framework under section 95 ERA 1996 and the cited authorities, the tribunal held there was no repudiatory breach, no course of conduct amounting to a last straw, and therefore no constructive unfair dismissal. The claim was dismissed in full apart from the withdrawn wages claim.