Claimant v Royal Mail Group Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found no breach of the implied duty of trust and confidence. While there was some conflict within the Enquiries Office, this could not be characterised as bullying. The tensions arose out of specific events and were addressed by management. The claimant resigned because he did not want to move to another role following a restructure, not because of any breach by the respondent.
The tribunal dismissed all 30 allegations of harassment. None of the treatment found to have taken place had the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment or violating the claimant's dignity. The claimant had not proved facts from which unlawful harassment could be concluded, and the respondent proved any treatment was in no sense whatsoever related to race. Allegations 1-8 were also out of time.
The tribunal found that the claimant had not proved facts from which it could conclude that the respondent had committed race discrimination. The respondent proved that any treatment found to have taken place was in no sense whatsoever because of race. The tribunal found that conflicts arose out of genuine workplace concerns about the claimant not pulling his weight, and management (particularly Mr Garcia) was supportive of the claimant throughout. Allegations 1-8 were also out of time.
Facts
The claimant, an Operational Postal Grade employee working part-time (20 hours) in the Enquiries Office at Royal Mail's Kiln Farm Delivery Office since 2010, brought claims of constructive dismissal, harassment and race discrimination. He alleged 30 incidents of mistreatment by colleagues between December 2019 and August 2022, including verbal abuse, intimidation, and bullying. In August 2022, following a reduction in Enquiries Office workload, he was informed he would need to move to delivery or collections roles. He resigned in September 2022. The respondent's manager, Frank Garcia, had addressed multiple complaints supportively and arranged informal resolutions.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that conflicts arose from genuine workplace concerns about the claimant not pulling his weight (including being on the phone frequently and being away from the office when busy), not race. Management, particularly Mr Garcia, was supportive throughout. The claimant had not established facts from which discrimination or harassment could be inferred, and the respondent proved race played no part in any treatment. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence - the claimant resigned because he did not want to change roles, not due to any repudiatory breach. Allegations 1-8 were also out of time.
Practical note
Workplace conflicts and management decisions arising from genuine performance concerns, even if perceived as unfair by an employee, do not amount to discrimination without evidence linking the treatment to a protected characteristic; supportive management responses to complaints are strong evidence against discrimination allegations.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 3311777/2022
- Decision date
- 16 February 2024
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 4
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- logistics
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Operational Postal Grade
- Service
- 16 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No