Ms Margaret Broadfoot v Represented by: Ms M Gribbon - Solicitor SW Global Resourcing Ltd — 2023

Ms Margaret Broadfoot was employed by SW Global Resourcing Ltd from 18 August 2003 until her resignation on 9 October 2022. The dispute arose after the respondent increased the salary of Payroll Assistant Ms Kelly to retain her, then raised the claimant's salary to the same level, £26,500. The claimant complained that this was unfair because she had greater responsibility, and she later raised a formal grievance about the pay issue and about how the grievance was being handled. The tribunal found there was no express or implied contractual term requiring the Payroll Supervisor to be paid more than the Payroll Assistant, and that the grievance concerned fairness rather than a contractual entitlement.

The tribunal accepted that there had been delay in progressing the grievance, including a period of about three weeks before Ms Baggley became aware of it and further delay while Mr Raymond Johnstone investigated it. However, it found there was reasonable and proper cause for the initial delay because of confusion between Mr Beaver and HR, the respondent's busy period, and the understanding that the salary issue would be reviewed at the September appraisal. The tribunal also found that Ms Baggley did not ignore the grievance, appointed Mr Johnstone to hear it, and that Mr Johnstone kept the claimant updated as his investigation progressed.

The tribunal did not accept the claimant's case that Ms Baggley or Mr Johnstone acted in a way that was calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. It accepted that some of Mr Johnstone's comments at the 6 October 2022 meeting were unhelpful, including his references to bullying grievances and to the claimant's use of the word 'complaint', but it did not find that he was condescending, belittling or sarcastic. Looking at the respondent's conduct as a whole, the tribunal held that the delay and the manner of the 6 October meeting fell short of a fundamental breach of contract. As a result, the claimant was not entitled to resign and claim constructive dismissal, and the claim was dismissed.