Case 4100522/2017 · Employment Tribunal
(Sitting Alone) Miss K Adair v (1) Concept Barbers Ltd — 2017
- Case reference
- 4100522/2017
- Decision date
- 21 August 2017
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge P Wallington QC
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
(Sitting Alone) Miss K Adair
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Karen Adair was employed by Concept Barbers Ltd from 10 February 2006 as a gentleman's hairdresser. The tribunal accepted her evidence that part of her Saturday work had been paid in cash at Mr Conway's insistence, but held that she was a reluctant participant in that arrangement and that denying her access to her statutory and contractual claims would be disproportionate under Patel v Mirza. On that basis the tribunal held that it had jurisdiction, and it also found that she remained employed by the First Respondent throughout; there was no evidence that her employment had transferred to Conway Men’s Hairdressing Limited.
The tribunal found that the claimant's increased hours, first to three days a week and later to five days a week, were intended to be permanent or indefinite. It held that Mr Conway's unilateral reduction of her hours on 18 November 2016 from 32/40 hours per week to 16 hours per week, without her agreement and with a consequential reduction in pay, was a plain breach of contract and a repudiatory breach. The claimant protested, raised a grievance, and through solicitors sought reinstatement of her previous hours or negotiated redundancy terms. The tribunal found that she did not affirm the contract and that her resignation on 1 February 2017 was in response to the respondent's conduct, so she was constructively dismissed.
Because the First Respondent did not show a fair reason for dismissal, the tribunal held that the constructive dismissal was unfair. It awarded a basic award of £2,560, calculated on 10 years' service at a weekly pay rate of £256, and a compensatory award of £300 for the loss of accrued statutory employment rights. It also awarded £1,254 in breach of contract damages for lost net earnings over 11 weeks and £160 gross for accrued holiday pay. The total award was £4,274, and the tribunal made no order in respect of tribunal fees.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Found to be an unfair constructive dismissal; the claimant resigned in response to the respondent's unilateral reduction in hours and related breach of contract. | Upheld | — | £2,560 |
| Breach of contract | Unilateral imposition of reduced working hours and consequential reduction in pay; damages assessed by reference to lost net earnings over 11 weeks. | Upheld | — | £1,254 |
| Holiday pay | Payment in lieu of untaken holiday for accrued leave between 1 January and 3 February 2017, calculated under regulation 15 of the Working Time Regulations 1998. | Upheld | — | £160 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,274
- across all upheld claims
- Basic award
- £2,560
- statutory, unfair dismissal
- Compensatory award
- £300
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
7 references- Patel v Mirza
- s.94 ERA 1996
- s.95(1)(c) ERA 1996
- s.98(1) ERA 1996
- s.123 ERA 1996
- regulation 15 Working Time Regulations 1998
- Jones v F Sirl & Son (Furnishers) Ltd
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.