Claimant v The Board of Governors of Sherwood Park School

The tribunal found that whilst the claimant made two protected disclosures (grievance statement 15 March 2023 re health and safety, and email 5 July 2023 re financial mismanagement), the School did not subject him to detriment because of these disclosures. The alleged detriment (failing to comply with internal procedures when dealing with complaints) pre-dated the first disclosure and was not materially influenced by either disclosure. The delay was due to mismanagement, not the protected disclosures.

The tribunal found the claimant was constructively dismissed, but rejected the claim under s103A ERA 1996 that the principal reason for dismissal was protected disclosures. The tribunal concluded that the protected disclosures did not materially influence the School's breaches of contract or the constructive dismissal. The reason for dismissal was the School's mismanagement of pay and grievance processes, not the whistleblowing.

The tribunal found the claimant was constructively dismissed under s95(1)(c) ERA 1996. The School fundamentally breached the implied term of trust and confidence by: (1) failing to pay correct wages for 6 months (Nov 2022-May 2023) by wrongly imposing a contractual variation, and (2) badly mishandling the claimant's grievance about pay, taking 5 months for informal stage without proper engagement or resolution. The claimant resigned in response to these breaches. The School failed to prove a potentially fair reason for dismissal under s98.

Although the School underpaid the claimant for several months (Nov 2022-May 2023) by wrongly applying a 32.5 hour divisor rather than 25 hours, the tribunal calculated that over the entire period June 2022-September 2023 the claimant was actually overpaid overall (receiving £27,219.51 against contractual entitlement of £25,351.12 based on agreed variations only). Therefore there was no net unlawful deduction from wages for the period claimed.

Withdrawn by claimant at the outset of the hearing. He confirmed he did not pursue a claim that outstanding holiday pay entitlement had accrued but not been paid in his termination pay.