Claimant v Alicia Coffee House Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that the respondent did not breach the claimant's contract of employment, either through failure to pay full salary or by removing her managerial duties. The evidence showed the claimant continued to perform her key managerial tasks after the TUPE transfer. The conduct relied upon did not amount to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The claimant failed to discharge the burden of proving that the respondent's conduct destroyed or seriously damaged the relationship of trust and confidence without reasonable and proper cause.
Facts
The claimant was manager of a coffee shop whose employment transferred to the respondent under TUPE on 4 March 2024. She claimed that after the transfer her managerial role was eroded, her salary was reduced, and the supervisor was given a higher hourly rate and her duties. She resigned on 11 June 2024 citing the job role no longer being available, and relying on a 'last straw' incident where her manager allegedly mocked her over an incorrectly completed disciplinary process. The respondent denied the allegations and argued the claimant continued to perform her full managerial role and was paid her contractual salary in full.
Decision
The tribunal found the claimant had not established a breach of contract. The evidence showed she continued to perform her key managerial duties including rotas, staff holidays, ordering, banking, and disciplinary matters. Her salary was paid in full and she had agreed to the change from annual to hourly basis. The 'last straw' incident on 11 June 2024 did not constitute a breach and was not mentioned in her resignation letter. There was no dismissal, so the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed.
Practical note
A claimant alleging constructive dismissal following a TUPE transfer must provide clear documentary evidence that managerial duties were removed; self-serving oral evidence contradicted by contemporaneous documents and witness questionnaires will not suffice to establish a fundamental breach.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2501766/2024
- Decision date
- 25 January 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep
Employment details
- Role
- Manager of Sunderland coffee shop
- Salary band
- £25,000–£30,000
- Service
- 5 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No