In person For the v Mr M Foster, Solicitor Interpreter in the Bulgarian language: Ms Violeta Mondashka — 2023

Following a period of employment from 9 October 2017, the claimant was promoted to Head Housekeeper on 29 April 2019 at a salary of £24,000. The dispute arose during the first phase of the coronavirus pandemic. On 29 February and 2 March 2020 she emailed concerns about a colleague returning to work when unwell; Mr Redshaw warned her on 3 March 2020 that disciplinary action might follow. The tribunal later treated the protected disclosure and health and safety detriment complaints as out of time, and those complaints were withdrawn.

The respondent placed the claimant on furlough from March 2020 on terms that included 48 hours' notice to return and the use of annual leave during furlough. The tribunal found that the claimant's emails of 20 August and 28 August 2020 did not amount to valid requests for annual leave under reg.15 WTR or valid dependants leave requests under s.57A ERA, and that the related time-off complaints were out of time and withdrawn.

In late August 2020 the respondent required the claimant to return to work for the reopening of the hotel. The tribunal found that her explanations about family illness and vulnerability were vague, that she did not clearly explain when she could return, and that Mr Redshaw was entitled to conclude she was absent without authorisation. It held that the dismissal was not wrongful, but that the dismissal decision was unfair because the appeal was not conducted with an open mind and Mr Hughes had previously expressed the view that the claimant was stalling her return.

The tribunal held that the claimant contributed substantially to her dismissal and that it was just and equitable to reduce both the basic and compensatory awards by 80%. It also held that the respondent had not served a valid reg.15(2) notice for part of the annual leave directions, so the claimant had 12 days of annual leave accrued and untaken at termination. The unauthorised deduction from wages claim succeeded, but the gross daily rate and final monetary award were left to a remedy hearing listed for 30 January 2023.

The tribunal rejected the complaint about failure to provide a statement of particulars or changes, holding that the 29 April 2019 promotion email sufficiently notified the salary change to £24,000 per annum.