Mr J. Chapman v Stephensons of Essex Limited — 2023

The claimant, Mr J. Chapman, resigned on 6 January 2023 and alleged that a series of incidents between 2019 and 2023 amounted to a cumulative breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. Those matters included an admitted data breach in 2019, the respondent's decision not to furlough him in April 2020, the handling of later furlough requests, a dispute about statutory sick pay, a September 2022 visit to his home by Mr Simon Crump, the outcome of his grievance, and the grievance appeal process.

The tribunal accepted that the 2019 disclosure of the claimant's self-certification sickness form was a data breach, and it noted that the respondent upheld the complaint and introduced training. However, it found the incident was a single, relatively minor matter and not, on its own, enough objectively to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. The claimant's continuing work after the incident also meant that, even if it had been a breach, he had waived it and affirmed the contract.

On the furlough issue, the tribunal found the respondent had reasonable and proper cause for not placing the claimant on furlough in April 2020. It accepted that by 20 April 2020 furlough decisions had already been made, that the respondent needed minimum staffing to maintain a vital local bus service, and that the claimant had not provided supporting medical documentation to the respondent during that period. The later January 2021 furlough point and the alleged statutory sick pay issue were not pursued at the hearing.

The tribunal accepted the claimant's account that Mr Crump visited his home in September 2022, and it accepted that the claimant reasonably regarded the visit as an implicit accusation of dishonesty. But it found that Mr Crump was acting outside the scope of his role, on his own initiative and not under instruction from management, so his conduct was not treated as the respondent's conduct for constructive dismissal purposes. It also found that the grievance appeal hearing was not conducted rudely and that Mr Massey did not make the appeal decision, but merely sent the letter on Mr Hiron's behalf. Applying the constructive dismissal authorities it cited, including the implied term of trust and confidence, the last straw principle, the objective test, reasonable and proper cause, and Hilton International Hotels v Protopapa, the tribunal concluded there was no breach by the employer and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.