The tribunal report headline: “Personal trainer wins £149K after boss misses meeting.” The subheading: the PT drove from Germany to attend the meeting. The nature of the meeting: little more than an investigation, but the command to attend was at a time when the PT feared for her position. Are we getting any closer to the reason for such a substantial award?
Bethan Littlewood, a GB watersports gold medallist working for Nuffield Health, had reported her line manager DM for carrying out an MoD fitness test on an individual whose blood pressure should have precluded him from that test. DM’s figurative blood pressure was evidently so raised as a result that he subjected Ms Littlewood to a campaign of near persecution, anticipated by his reaction “you didn’t have to go and tell on me”. Withheld wages, pretext based removal of a photo with the gold medal on display, a humiliating reprimand in front of a member, and a contrived disciplinary hearing based on workplace phone use despite the lack of a confirmatory policy. Ms Littlewood received a highly questionable final written warning. She went off sick, but chose not to resign.
Then came the summons to the meeting. Ms Littlewood had asked to take annual leave during her sickness absence, to place her desire to attend a competition in Germany on a proper footing. DM refused, incorrectly asserting that annual leave could not be taken when an employee was off sick. Having travelled to Germany to compete, Ms Littlewood heard from JC, a manager whom she had told about the competition, that he “required her attendance” on 12 September. Fearing the consequences of non-attendance when on a final written warning, she drove back to the UK through the night…
As the tribunal then put it: “The Claimant made considerable effort, under considerable duress, to attend the meeting; JC did not have the courtesy to be at that meeting or make arrangements for someone to meet with her in his place.”
Ms Littlewood resigned, claimed constructive dismissal, and won her claim. The tribunal agreed that the meeting incident was the last straw in a series of breaches of the implied term of mutual trust and confidence. That puts it mildly. The exact observation was “if there was one act that demonstrated the contemptuous manner of the Claimant’s treatment, this was it.”
How did this lead to an award of £149,000? There were other elements beyond mere compensation for unfair dismissal. Wrongfully withheld wages, benefits and holiday pay. A substantial injured feelings award based on the protected disclosure (“whistleblowing”) when Ms Littlewood reported DM and suffered detriment as a result. And an “ACAS uplift” of 10%, reflecting what the tribunal thought of Nuffield’s procedural approach, or indeed lack of one.
Was this a case where an employer could have benefitted from precautionary legal advice prior to Ms Littlewood’s resignation? Probably not. If the managers’ attitude towards her was as the tribunal described, it may have been too late. Whether any subsequent advice might have saved the company a six day hearing, a heavy award and embarrassing headlines is a different question altogether.
Are you involved in a constructive dismissal dispute, from either side of the desk? Do you need a helping hand? Get in touch. Contact David Cooper on 07450 350715 or via david@wolverhamptonemploymentlaw.co.uk .
Share this post: