Cases1403622/2022

Claimant v Cornwall Council

23 January 2024Before Employment Judge N J RoperBodminin person

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Constructive Dismissalfailed

The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract by the respondent. The respondent had dealt with the claimant's 2019 grievance appropriately and the agreed working arrangement between claimant and the female colleague had functioned well for two and a half years. When new contact occurred in June 2022, the respondent acted supportively — the claimant blocked Facebook messages herself, was advised to ignore Teams calls, and when she requested intervention on 11 July 2022, management immediately agreed to seek HR advice the next day. The claimant resigned before the respondent could take further action. The tribunal concluded the respondent's conduct throughout was exemplary and did not breach the implied term of trust and confidence.

Facts

The claimant worked for Cornwall Council for nearly 15 years as a Technical Support Team Leader. In 2018 she made a whistleblowing disclosure about two colleagues. Her identity was inadvertently disclosed and she suffered harassment from a female colleague (FC), leading to a grievance in 2019 which was upheld. An agreement was reached that FC would only contact the claimant for work-related matters, which worked successfully for two and a half years. In June 2022, FC, who was suffering mental health difficulties and on sick leave, began contacting the claimant via Facebook (which the claimant blocked) and Teams (which the claimant agreed to ignore). When the claimant asked management to intervene on 11 July 2022, they immediately agreed to seek HR advice. The claimant resigned the next morning before any further action could be taken.

Decision

The tribunal dismissed the claim for constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the respondent had not breached the implied term of trust and confidence. The respondent had dealt appropriately with the 2019 grievance, supported the claimant throughout with occupational health assistance, and when new issues arose in June/July 2022, responded promptly and supportively. When the claimant specifically requested intervention on 11 July, management immediately agreed to take advice, but the claimant resigned before they could act. The tribunal found the respondent's conduct throughout had been exemplary.

Practical note

An employer does not breach the implied term of trust and confidence where it responds supportively to complaints, even if final resolution is incomplete, particularly where the employer demonstrates it is actively seeking to address concerns and is balancing competing interests such as the mental health of another employee.

Legal authorities cited

Western Excavating v Sharp [1978] ICR 221Omilaju v Waltham Forest London Borough Council [2005] IRLR 35 CABuckland v Bournemouth University Higher Education Corporation [2010] IRLR 445 CAKaur v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust [2018] EWCALeeds Dental Team v Rose [2014] IRLR 8 EATHilton v Shiner Ltd - Builders Merchants [2001] IRLR 727 EATMalik v Bank of Credit and Commerce International [1998] AC 20

Statutes

Employment Rights Act 1996 s.98(4)Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 s.207AEmployment Rights Act 1996 s.95(1)(c)

Case details

Case number
1403622/2022
Decision date
23 January 2024
Hearing type
full merits
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Technical Support Team Leader
Service
15 years

Claimant representation

Represented
No