Herself, in person For the v Respondent — 2023

The tribunal found that Mrs Colston was employed as a dental receptionist from 27 August 2013 until her dismissal on 10 February 2021. It accepted that performance issues pre-dated the arrival of Caroline Simmons as Practice Manager, and that Ms Simmons took over direct management of the claimant in March 2019 after observing a poor working relationship between the claimant and Angela McFarlane and identifying ongoing performance concerns.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that dismissal was really because Ms Simmons had learned in 2018 that she had previously brought an employment tribunal claim, or because of Ms McFarlane's dislike of her. It found no reliable evidence that the earlier tribunal claim affected how Ms Simmons treated the claimant, and concluded that the reason for dismissal was poor performance. The tribunal held that the respondent had a fair capability reason within section 98 ERA 1996, and that the performance management process was followed over a substantial period with checklists, informal and formal PIPs, warnings, additional training, and repeated review meetings.

Although the tribunal upheld three of the claimant's grievance points about Ms McFarlane's conduct, including that she had demonstrated overbearing levels of performance supervision, it did not uphold the complaint that the PIP should be removed. It also found that the claimant had misunderstood the role of recalls/call backs in the process, and that this was not a fundamental part of why she was dismissed. The tribunal held that the respondent acted within the range of reasonable responses, that the claimant had been given a considerable opportunity to improve, and that the appeal process before Ms Clague was thorough and fair. The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.