Claimant v Alexander Optometrists Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the respondent breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence by: (1) requiring the claimant to work an additional unpaid 15 minutes daily for about 5 years; (2) Mr Surtees asking 'what will it take for you to go?' on 11 June 2024; (3) advertising her job whilst she was on sick leave; and (4) failing to address her grievances. These breaches cumulatively and individually entitled her to resign and claim constructive dismissal. The dismissal was unfair as the respondent did not prove a fair reason for dismissal.
Withdrawn by claimant as the monies owed had been paid to her.
Facts
The claimant worked as an Optical Assistant for 6 years at a small opticians. For around 5 years she was required to work an unpaid additional 15 minutes daily. On 11 June 2024, the owner Mr Surtees asked staff about a 'toxic work environment' without warning. When the claimant responded emotionally, he asked 'what will it take for you to go?'. The claimant went on sick leave. On 19 June 2024 her job was advertised. She resigned on 12 July 2024 after the respondent invited her to an investigation meeting but failed to address her grievances about Mr Surtees' conduct.
Decision
The tribunal found the respondent breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence through: unpaid overtime, Mr Surtees' comment on 11 June 2024, advertising the claimant's job whilst on sick leave, and failing to address her grievances. The claimant was constructively and unfairly dismissed. The respondent did not prove a fair reason for dismissal. However, there was a 50% chance she would have been fairly dismissed by 23 August 2024 for misconduct or breakdown in relationships had a fair procedure been followed. Remedy to be determined at a further hearing.
Practical note
In small businesses, directors must be especially careful when handling workplace conflicts involving their spouses, ensure contractual terms on working hours and pay are honoured, and never ask 'what will it take for you to go?' even in frustration—such comments can constitute a fundamental breach of trust and confidence.
Adjustments
50% chance the claimant would have been fairly dismissed by 23 August 2024 for either misconduct (historic bullying allegations) or some other substantial reason (breakdown in working relationships), had a fair procedure been followed. Tribunal found colleague complaints could have led to a disciplinary process, but lacked specific details and claimant's version was unknown.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 6013922/2024
- Decision date
- 5 August 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- healthcare
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Optical Assistant
- Service
- 6 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No