Cases3312558/2023

Claimant v Hillview Medical Centre

24 February 2025Before Employment Judge HarrisonReadingin person

Outcome

Partly successful£561

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract by the respondent. The respondent supported the claimant during her wrist injury recovery by allowing home working, made an OH referral appropriately, set clinics at 75% of contracted hours per OH advice, and immediately offered further reduction when concerns were raised on 5 June. The tribunal concluded the respondent did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence and the test in Western Excavating was not met.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagessucceeded

The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that she worked the hours claimed in March 2023 from home, working in shorter daily blocks due to her wrist injury rather than two long days. The claimant actually worked more than contracted hours. A later audit and deduction of £560.74 for allegedly 18.5 hours not worked was found to be unauthorised and in breach of Part II ERA, as the claimant was not overpaid and the work was done.

Facts

The claimant was an Advanced Nurse Practitioner who fractured her wrist in March 2023 while on holiday. The respondent allowed her to work from home during recovery, contrary to normal practice. She completed an audit and telephone consultations from home. In April 2023 she returned to the workplace for reduced face-to-face work but experienced pain and went off sick. Following an OH referral recommending 75% hours and home working, she returned to work from home in late May. On 1 and 5 June she worked clinics she felt were too busy. She resigned on 5 June 2023. The respondent later deducted £560.74 from her wages relating to March 2023 hours.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the constructive dismissal claim, finding the respondent had not breached the implied term of trust and confidence. The respondent supported the claimant appropriately during her injury recovery, followed OH advice, and offered further reductions when concerns were raised. The tribunal upheld the unlawful deduction from wages claim, accepting the claimant had worked the disputed hours in March 2023 and ordered repayment of £560.74.

Practical note

An employer who demonstrably supports an injured employee by varying normal working practices, following occupational health advice, and responding promptly to concerns is unlikely to be found in fundamental breach even where the employee subjectively feels unsupported.

Award breakdown

Unpaid wages£561

Legal authorities cited

Western Excavating v Sharp [1978] ICR 221

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.95(1)(c)ERA 1996 s.13ERA 1996 s.14(1)ERA 1996 Part II

Case details

Case number
3312558/2023
Decision date
24 February 2025
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
3
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Advanced Nurse Practitioner
Service
5 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No