Claimant v Robinson Way Limited

All reasonable adjustments claims relating to headset, hot-desking, noise levels, and car parking pre-November 2019 were out of time (by 5-18 months). Tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds. Claimant had chosen not to bring proceedings after matters were resolved internally in November 2019, then raised them again months later in context of unrelated disciplinary matters.

Allegations 9.1-9.8 (up to November 2019) were out of time and time not extended. Allegations 9.9 and 9.10 (regarding requirement to log on 10-15 minutes early and resulting disciplinary action) failed on merits. The instruction to log on early was given to all contact centre employees regardless of disability, was not related to disability, and did not have the purpose or effect of violating dignity or creating a hostile environment under s.26 Equality Act 2010.

Tribunal found that the disciplinary processes from May 2020 onwards were not in any way carried out or influenced by the claimant's grievance 18 months earlier or her November 2019 email threatening discrimination proceedings. The disciplinary procedures were followed for legitimate reasons unrelated to any protected acts. The email of 12 May 2020 was not a protected act as it contained no hint of alleging contravention of the Equality Act.

The respondent's insistence that the claimant start work 15 minutes before her contractual start time was a breach of contract. The respondent's confused messaging (suggesting but actually insisting on early starts) together with its decision to discipline an employee who had been reasonable in persisting with her objections amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence and a fundamental breach of contract. The claimant resigned in response to this breach (though also motivated by her difficult position regarding her untruthfulness about covert recording).

Having found constructive dismissal, the respondent conceded there was no fair reason for dismissal. However, the tribunal exercised its discretion under s.123(6) and s.122(2) ERA to award nil compensation due to the seriousness of the claimant's misconduct in covertly recording the disciplinary hearing and being persistently untruthful about it throughout the remainder of her employment, in the tribunal proceedings, and in her failure to comply with case management orders. Tribunal found she would have been fairly dismissed within 2 weeks in any event.