In person For the v Respondent — 2024

Mr Andrew Perry resigned without notice on 30 September 2022 after employment from 1 September 2017 as a maths teacher at the respondent special school. He presented a constructive dismissal claim under section 95(1) ERA 1996, relying on allegations including exposure to tobacco smoke, a DBS referral, pressure around a settlement agreement, disciplinary action, lack of restorative justice training, and alleged poor performance concerns.

The tribunal accepted that there had been a significant number of complaints and safeguarding referrals during the employment, but found the respondent had reasonable and proper cause to investigate them. It found the respondent's witnesses consistent and reliable, and did not accept the claimant's evidence where it conflicted with the documents or other witnesses. The tribunal also noted that the claimant did not raise a grievance during employment and that his resignation letter made no reference to the matters later relied on.

On the specific allegations, the tribunal found there was insufficient evidence that the claimant had been exposed to significant tobacco smoke at work, and in any event accepted that some smoking took place outdoors and was addressed by the school. It held that the DBS referral was reasonable and in line with safeguarding guidance, that the without prejudice settlement discussions could not support a breach, that the disciplinary investigations and warnings were reasonable and proportionate, that additional restorative justice training would not have been useful because the pupils were unwilling to take part, and that the performance concerns and support plan were genuine rather than exaggerated or unfounded.

Applying the constructive dismissal test in Weston Excavating (ECC) Ltd v Sharp and the implied term of trust and confidence, the tribunal concluded that the respondent's conduct did not amount to a repudiatory breach. The claim was therefore not well founded and was dismissed.