ETZ 4(WR) IN THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL (SCOTLAND) AT EDINBURGH Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No: 4101893/2020 Held at Edinburgh on 4, 5, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, (25), and th February 2021 with Deliberation on and March 2021 Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Ms E A Gibson v Assisted by Ms C Downie, friend Moore House School Limited (Moore House — 2021

The tribunal dismissed the whistleblowing complaint. It found that the claimant's criticisms of the person B disciplinary outcome were opinions rather than protected disclosures, that her anonymous complaint to the Care Inspectorate was too unspecific and was not shown to have been communicated to the respondent, and that the May 2019 Butterstone conversation about person A did not satisfy section 43B ERA 1996. It also found no causal link between any alleged disclosure and the treatment complained of.

On the person A issue, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had already been told by the respondent's managing director about the historical allegation disclosed by person A and the enhanced recruitment checks carried out at the point of recruitment. It rejected the claimant's account that Mr Baillie had told her that person A had hypnotised young people to have sex with them, and found that what she said to Dr Drysdale and Ms McRailed in May 2019 was speculative, lacked reasonable grounds, and did not show any danger to health and safety or deliberate concealment.

The tribunal upheld constructive unfair dismissal under section 95(1)(c) ERA 1996. It held that the claimant had affirmed any earlier alleged breaches by accepting the new Director of Development post on 24 June 2019 and working in it for about six months, so the April and May 2019 complaints could not found the resignation. It then found that the 4 November 2019 verbal warning was issued contrary to the respondent's own disciplinary procedure, was not properly authorised, and, with the failure to rescind it, amounted to a material breach of contract and a breach of trust and confidence. The claimant resigned on 30 December 2019 in response to that breach.

On remedy, the parties had agreed a pre-reduction basic award of £3,150 and £300 for loss of statutory rights. The tribunal reduced the basic award by £630, or one fifth, because it found the claimant's May 2019 Butterstone conduct blameworthy under section 122 ERA 1996, leaving a basic award of £2,520. It held that the claimant would have left by 30 March 2020 in any event and therefore limited compensation to the agreed £300 for loss of statutory rights. The total award was £2,820.