Ms Helen Harper v Spire Healthcare Limited — 2022

Ms Harper was employed by Spire Healthcare Limited as a Business Development Manager from 5 December 2011 until she gave notice on 21 June 2021, with an agreed effective termination date of 1 July 2021. She claimed constructive dismissal, alleging breaches of the implied term of trust and confidence arising from Spire's handling of concerns about her working relationship with Fiona Syder, the handling of her grievance, Mr Haider's management, and a June 2021 return to work meeting said to be the final straw.

The tribunal found that there were issues or tensions in the working relationship between Ms Harper and Ms Syder, and that Spire had reasonable and proper cause to address them. It accepted that some wording in Mr Hume's 18 November 2020 email, including references to a "fractious" relationship and matters "spilling over" into departments, was inappropriate or unprofessional, but found that the email was sent in good faith as a constructive attempt to resolve workplace issues and was not calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence.

The tribunal found that Ms Harper's grievance was properly investigated and satisfactorily addressed. It held that Mrs Bishop's investigation was full and fair, that the timing was reasonable in the circumstances including Covid-19 restrictions and Christmas, and that the appeal process upheld the original findings with further recommendations. It also found no evidential basis for Ms Harper's allegations that Mr Haider managed her in a way that breached the implied term, and preferred the respondent's evidence about the January and June 2021 return to work meetings.

The tribunal found that the 21 June 2021 meeting was not a final straw and did not amount to a breach of trust and confidence. It found that Ms Harper attended with a sealed resignation letter, had already verbally accepted a role with Birketts, and had indicated to Birketts on 16 June 2021 that she would resign the following week. As no breach of the implied term was established, the questions of resignation in response to breach and affirmation did not arise. The complaint of unfair dismissal was not well founded and no remedy was awarded.