Mr R Wayman, Counsel For the v Respondent — 2021

This was a liability judgment by Employment Judge Bedeau sitting with Mrs I Sood and Mr N Boustred. The claimant's sex discrimination and equal pay claims were withdrawn at the hearing and recorded as dismissed upon withdrawal. The remaining claims concerned constructive unfair dismissal, two whistleblowing claims, wrongful dismissal, bonus, holiday, pension contributions, and victimisation.

The tribunal accepted that the claimant had a long employment history with the respondent and that, after Mrs Shephard became more involved in management, the relationship became strained. It found that changes around sick pay, holiday arrangements and later proposed contracts, together with the way the grievance and appeal processes were handled, amounted cumulatively to a breach of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. It also relied on the 8 October 2018 letter to Tenet Connect, the instruction that sickness absence had to be reported by telephone to Mrs Shephard, and the handling of the LTIP bonus issue. The tribunal held that the claimant did not affirm the breach, resigned on 4 January 2019, and was constructively dismissed; it also recorded a 25% reduction for contributory conduct and a 20% ACAS uplift on compensatory loss, but no quantum was fixed because the remedy hearing was listed later.

The whistleblowing claims failed. The tribunal considered alleged disclosures said to concern data protection, FCA compliance, company funds, printer access, Prism's access to computers, deleted emails, holiday arrangements, and a suitability letter. It held that several items were not disclosures of information at all, or were not made with a reasonable belief that they were in the public interest, and some were only enquiries or matters affecting the claimant's own position. On the detriment and protected-disclosure dismissal claims, the tribunal found no qualifying protected acts or no causal link of the kind required, so those claims were dismissed.

On the remaining claims, the tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to 10 weeks' notice and therefore succeeded on wrongful dismissal, but the incentive bonus claim was struck out as out of time under the Bear Scotland analysis. The pension claim failed because the tribunal found the contractual employer contribution was 3% of salary, not 10%. The tribunal recorded the holiday claim as well-founded, although its reasoning said no payment was due for the Christmas closure days because the claimant had the option to take leave or work those days and did not. The victimisation claim was dismissed because the tribunal found no evidence that the failure to provide a reference was materially influenced by the earlier protected act.