in person (unrepresented) For the v Respondent — 2017

The claimant resigned on 4 April 2018 after complaints about the handling of the Network Director/Manager vacancy, alleged changes to his role, and alleged bullying by senior managers. The tribunal found that the October 2017 Bierfest conversation about the vacant senior role was only an exploratory discussion, that the claimant was later given an opportunity to apply for the regraded Network Manager post, and that he chose not to apply or raise a grievance at the time. It also found that he remained Regional Commercial Manager North and that the evidence did not show a unilateral change to his role.

The tribunal rejected the allegation that the respondent's conduct amounted to a repudiatory breach or a cumulative series of breaches. It accepted that management meetings were demanding and that Mr Blakeley challenged the claimant over confidential information, but did not find that this, the text messages, or the alleged comments and gestures proved bullying or harassment amounting to constructive dismissal. It also noted that the claimant had begun looking for other work in February 2018, resigned only after securing alternative employment, and did not raise a grievance until after he had decided to leave.

The complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was dismissed. On the bonus issue, the tribunal found that the bonus scheme was non-contractual, but that the respondent had decided to award a 2017 bonus and had calculated it using the wrong salary figure. Applying the correct figure and the performance percentage accepted on the evidence, the tribunal held that the claimant should have received £3,357.42 rather than £2,400, and ordered payment of the shortfall of £957.42 within 14 days.