Mrs Joanne Milton v Stephen MS Lai & Co Business Consulting Limited — 2022

Mrs Joanne Milton worked for Stephen MS Lai & Co Business Consulting Limited as an administrator from 1 October 2017 until she resigned on 1 October 2019. The tribunal found that she had raised a grievance about being paid statutory sick pay in September 2019 while her male colleague had previously been paid full pay on sick leave, and that Mr Lai’s response to that grievance on 1 October 2019 did not follow the respondent’s grievance procedure. Applying the constructive dismissal authorities it identified, the tribunal held that this failure was a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.

The tribunal found that Mrs Milton resigned in response to that breach and had not affirmed the contract. It therefore found constructive dismissal and held that the complaint of unfair dismissal succeeded. It also held that there was no potentially fair reason for dismissal and that the dismissal was not fair in all the circumstances because the respondent had not dealt with the grievance properly.

On sex discrimination, the tribunal found that the claimant was treated less favourably in relation to sick pay because she received SSP in September 2019 while her male comparator had been paid full sick pay. It accepted that the burden of proof shifted to the respondent and concluded that the explanation advanced by Mr Lai, based on family financial circumstances and an alleged agreement for the comparator to work back hours later, was not cogent and did not show that sex played no part in the decision. However, the tribunal rejected the separate allegation that Mr Lai was less supportive of the claimant while she was off sick.

For remedy, the tribunal awarded a basic award of £1,422.69 and a compensatory award of £2,363.14 for the unfair dismissal. For the discrimination claim, it awarded £1,516.09 for financial loss, including £136.93 interest, and £3,595.73 for injury to feelings, including £595.73 interest. The total award was £8,897.65. It also considered holiday pay and found that the claimant had no accrued untaken holiday remaining, so no award was made on that claim.