Mrs. S Craven v Lincolnshire County Council — 2021

Mrs S Craven brought a constructive unfair dismissal claim against Lincolnshire County Council after resigning on 13 January 2020. The tribunal found that her dissatisfaction stemmed largely from the TUPE transfer from Lincolnshire Community Health Services in October 2018 and from the fact that she did not receive NHS pay awards after transfer, but it held that the Respondent had not misrepresented the position at transfer and had provided consultation, FAQs and comparisons of terms and conditions. The tribunal also found that the later G9/G10 pay progression arrangements were introduced after the NHS pay increase had occurred, were consulted on with the unions, and were aimed at fair progression rather than pressuring staff to leave AfC contracts.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's complaints about workload and caseload. It found that the increase in her caseload was not covertly or arbitrarily imposed, that other health visitors were also affected, and that management used caseload reviews, supervision and the Capacity Escalation Pathway to keep workloads under review. It also found that the KPI system was a service monitoring tool rather than performance-related pay or a performance management process, and that the industrial action period was managed through triage and a Business Continuity Plan rather than stockpiling work for returning staff.

On the grievance and Health Management issues, the tribunal held that the grievance procedure was handled appropriately, including offering an alternative senior manager once the claimant objected to Linda Dennett. It found that the contact from Health Management resulted from a mistaken use of the claimant's mobile number on another referral, for which Ms Churchill apologised, and that there was no retaliatory motive. The tribunal also rejected the claimant's argument that she had been dismissed when her notice was processed incorrectly; it found that the 3 March 2020 date was an arithmetical error, not an intention to dismiss, and that she was paid during the notice period.

Applying the constructive dismissal principles, including the need for a repudiatory breach, the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, and the requirement that resignation be in response to the breach, the tribunal held that the claimant had not resigned because of any breach by the Respondent. It found that she had already secured alternative NHS employment and that the timing of her resignation was driven by the conclusion of her pay and grading negotiations with that employer. The claim was therefore dismissed in full.