Case 8000034/2023 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000034/20235 Held at Aberdeen on August & September 2023 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mrs E Idzikowska
Mrs Emma Idzikowska was employed by Aberdeenshire Council as a supply teacher at Peterhead Academy from 19 April 2022 on a one-year contract. She had been instrumental in setting up the Employer Engagement Volunteer Scheme with Score and other partners, and by the end of August 2022 the scheme had volunteers in both the Maths and Technical departments. After Gerard McCluskey became Acting Head Teacher, he met the claimant on 15 September 2022 to discuss the scheme.
The central dispute was what was said at that meeting. The tribunal preferred Mr McCluskey's evidence, supported by Christine Milne and contemporaneous emails, and found that he did not tell the claimant she had to stop being involved in the scheme, did not accuse her of a conflict of interest, and did not accuse her of criminal wrongdoing. The tribunal found that he was supportive of the scheme, appreciated the claimant's work, and was concerned only about the need to handle school information appropriately when she was also working at Score. The claimant's own email the next morning referred only to being 'likely to be taken off partnership working', which the tribunal regarded as inconsistent with her account that she had already been told to stop.
Applying the constructive dismissal authorities, including s.95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, Western Excavating, and the implied term of trust and confidence discussed in Malik and Woods, the tribunal held that the respondent had not committed a fundamental breach. It found that the claimant had misinterpreted what had been said at the meeting, that she did not appear upset or aggrieved at the time, and that her resignation later that day was based on a misunderstanding for which the respondent was not responsible. The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The claim was pleaded as constructive and unfair dismissal. The tribunal treated the issue as whether the claimant had been constructively dismissed and held that she had not established a breach of contract or of the implied term of trust and confidence. | Dismissed | — | — |
The 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.
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.