E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) In the Employment Tribunal (Scotland) at Edinburgh Judgment of the Employment Tribunal in Case No.4109715/2021 Issued following an Open Preliminary Hearing Held In Person at Edinburgh on October 2021 at am with Deliberation on October 2021 Employment Judge J G d’Inverno Mr C Oliveira v ASA International Limited st and 1 other — 2021

The tribunal heard an open preliminary hearing on whether Mr Oliveira's complaints were in time. It found that he worked as a temporary agency worker for ASA International Ltd at Drumbrae Care Home, that his last shift was on 6 November 2020, that he first engaged with ACAS on 17 May 2021, and that his ET1 was presented on 23 May 2021. The tribunal held that the three-month time limit for the alternative automatic unfair dismissal claim expired on 6 February 2021, and the time limit for the whistleblowing detriment claim expired on 13 March 2021.

On the detriment claim, Mr Oliveira relied on the cancellation of booked shifts on 7 November 2020, delay in dealing with his complaints, and a grievance outcome letter dated 20 April 2021 and sent again electronically on 4 May 2021. The tribunal found that the 20 April 2021 letter was a grievance outcome that substantially upheld his complaints and gave reassurance about future work, but that it was not a detriment under section 47B when judged objectively under Shamoon. It also found that the earlier matters were separate incidents, involved different respondents, and were not sufficiently connected to amount to a series for section 48(4).

The tribunal found that ASA International Ltd cancelled the booked shifts because it discovered that Mr Oliveira was working both in the care home and full-time in schools, contrary to then-applicable Scottish Government cross-infection guidance, and not because he had made a protected disclosure. It also found that the delay in investigating his grievance was caused by Covid-related staffing absences. The tribunal rejected the argument that pursuing internal procedures made it not reasonably practicable to present the claims in time, noting that Mr Oliveira had access to the internet, the Employment Tribunal and ACAS websites, had consulted the Citizens Advice Bureau, and had not been prevented from claiming by ignorance of his rights or the time limits. It therefore dismissed both claims for want of jurisdiction.