Mr G Beck v Represented by Mr G Nesbitt Lay representative Loch Tay Highland Lodge Park Ltd — 2019

Mr G Beck brought a claim for unfair constructive dismissal arising out of his employment as a groundsman with Loch Tay Highland Lodge Park Ltd, which began on 1 May 2013 and ended on 1 April 2019 after he resigned by letter dated 14 March 2019. The tribunal heard evidence about two grievances, concern about health and safety on site, and the events around a welfare meeting on 11 March 2019 and the claimant’s later resignation. The respondent’s witnesses were preferred on conflicts of evidence.

The tribunal found that the first grievance, raised in March 2018, was dealt with informally after Joanna Barrie spoke to the other employee involved, who accepted that the claimant had not shouted at her and that the matter was resolved. The second grievance, lodged in December 2018, was investigated by speaking to several members of staff, the claimant was invited to a grievance meeting and given anonymised statements, and the grievance was not upheld on 6 January 2019. The supplementary grievance about alleged cash payments and tips was also investigated by speaking to Mr Aitchison and others, and the tribunal found that Ms Barrie was entitled to rely on those enquiries and on the explanation that there was no evidence of theft.

The tribunal also rejected the claimant’s attempt to rely on wider health and safety matters as part of the constructive dismissal case. It found that no health and safety issue had been raised before 14 January 2019, that the claimant’s pleadings did not support many of the later matters advanced, and that the health and safety concerns were an afterthought following the grievance outcome. The tribunal accepted that Ms Barrie told the claimant she was the point of contact for health and safety issues and that he had been told to raise such matters with her, not with other staff.

Applying the law on constructive dismissal and the implied term of mutual trust and confidence, including Western Excavating v Sharp and the Malik line of authority, the tribunal held that the respondent’s conduct, viewed objectively and as a whole, was not calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage trust and confidence. It found that the respondent had acted fairly and appropriately, had investigated the grievances thoroughly, had offered appeal routes and extensions, and had tried to support the claimant during sickness absence. The claim was therefore dismissed.