Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Claimant, Mr. Michael Sullivan, was employed by Anglian Windows Limited since 2003. In March 2021, he was instructed to work on the 'window line' but refused, swore at management, and left the site without permission, leading to an unexcused absence classification. He submitted a grievance and later resigned, alleging constructive unfair dismissal and non-payment of wages. The Tribunal found the Claimant's health and safety claims unfounded, his behavior unprofessional, and his constructive dismissal claim not made out due to insufficient evidence of fundamental breach by the employer.
Issues
- The Claimant alleged constructive unfair dismissal under s.98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, claiming the Respondent breached essential contract terms including trust and confidence, failure to address health and safety concerns, and inadequate grievance resolution. The Tribunal found the Claimant's resignation was not justified by the employer's conduct.
- The Claimant claimed automatic unfair dismissal under s.100(1)(c) and (e) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, alleging he was dismissed for raising health and safety concerns about COVID-19. The Tribunal concluded the employer's conduct (reassigning work areas with safety measures) did not constitute a fundamental breach and the danger was not serious or imminent.
Holdings
- The Tribunal found the Claimant's assertion that he suffered detriments for raising health and safety matters was not well founded, citing his dishonesty and inappropriate conduct.
- The Claimant was not constructively dismissed as his resignation was not a result of the Respondent's fundamental breach of contract.
- The Claimant was not automatically unfairly dismissed under s.100 ERA 1996 for health and safety reasons, as the circumstances of danger were not reasonably believed to be serious and imminent.
Legal Principles
- The implied term in a contract of employment that the employer will not conduct themselves in a manner calculated or likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of confidence and trust between employer and employee. A breach of this term constitutes a fundamental breach amounting to repudiation, allowing the employee to resign without notice if the conduct is sufficiently serious.
- Automatic unfair dismissal under Section 100(1)(c) and (e) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for raising health and safety concerns. The employee must demonstrate that the dismissal was primarily due to raising health and safety issues by reasonable means, and that the employer's conduct was not reasonably practicable to address through safety representatives.
Cited Statute
Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA)
Judge Name
Postle
Passage Text
- 50. Therefore, the Claimant's claims that he suffered detriments for raising Health and Safety matters is simply not well founded.
- 1. The Claimant was not constructively dismissed. 2. The Claimant was not automatically unfairly dismissed for Health and Safety Reasons. 3. The Claimant's claim he suffered detriments when raising Health and Safety issues is not well founded.
- 46. It is clear the reason why the Claimant was sent to the Manager's Office on 30 March 2021 was the Claimant's failure to follow a reasonable management instruction as to where he was to work on that day.