Constructive dismissal

Rumbelina

At one point you say the area manager role was done away with but later say another area manager is still there. I was told my role no longer existed, but there is still an area manager in the business and she wasn't made to step down. She is in a different location (still commutable) whilst the role is the same her title is area sales manager and in my grievance they tried to argue it was a different role because it's a different job title

So, what time period elapsed between resigning and making a claim? Are you currently unemployed or working for another company (this will affect any award made)?

I resigned, followed the grievance process through to completion of appeal and then put in the ET1, it was roughly 2 months. I am in a new role but my OTE is significantly lower than in my last role

Have you been though ACAS yet and if so what what offered?

I'm based in NI so ACAS isn't active here, we have Labour Relations and they only get involved after the ET1 is submitted

Did you raise the consultation process in your grievance? (I guessing you did and the company addressed that.)

Yes I did, that was the main aspect of my grievance, but was consistently told it was not a redundancy situation as they kept the basic the same

Being given less responsibility and/ or status can be evidence of bullying - you don’t appear to have mentioned this - and with a difference in treatement because of a protected characteristic, would support such a claim, but again, you don’t appear to be claiming for a protected characteristic.

Part of my grievance was also the treatment by senior management including the HRD and the CEO, this included an inappropriate joke about an English woman, being told I had made an error of judgement by accompanying a colleague into a consultation meeting, and a number of sarcastic comments aimed towards me .. I decided to leave that out of the ET1 as I would like to think that I had not been discriminated against or bullied out of the organization and I felt (perhaps wrongly) that the process/non process was already unfair

Sorry can't figure out how to do the quotes that you've been doing in your messages!

robatwork

I have been involved in the ET process.

Whenever I see the employee claim "humiliation" I surmise it won't go well for them.

Do you have witnesses to back up your claim that you appeared humiliated in front of them?

Dox

Rumbelina wrote: »

I have taken advice but as I have a new job if this was to progress the reward wouldn't be huge and whilst I want to take this further out of principal I do not want to end up out of pocket.

The reward, if any, is likely to be peanuts - with the huge downside that you will have a pyrrhic victory at best, which is likely to damage your chances with future employers.

I don't know which principle you think is worth pursuing when you would be much better off, in every sense of the word, by looking to the future rather than grizzling about the past (and yes, that is so much easier to say than do!). Don't mire yourself in events which upset you; look to what is coming up and how to make the best of that.

nicechap

If you’re in Northern Ireland where employment laws are a devolved area and can differ from GB employment law, I think it makes even more sense to take proper advice. Many lawyers do a free 15 or 30 minute consultation where you can explain your arguments and get immediate feedback.

getmore4less

If there is a time limit like England, the process used to change the job and it should have been redundancy and the job was not a suitable alternative already out of time.

That leaves they lied about another potential job.

If everyone that got misled by promises resigned and went to an ET for constructive dismissal the courts would be swamped.

The time to get legal advice was over 3 months ago.

steampowered

I see you are in NI which has very similar but slightly different employment laws to England & Wales. The below is just based on English law.

As you have already served your ET1, it is difficult to add more to your claim at this stage. You will just have to wait for the ET3. Perhaps the employer will offer to settle.

Conceptually, it is true that a demotion / change in role can constitute a constructive dismissal.

The difficulty with constructive dismissal cases is that you have to prove that the employer was in "repudiatory" (i.e. very serious" breach of your employment contract.

This is quite a strict test and it is not obvious to me that the test has been met on the facts of your case.

My question is around the diminished responsibility and and whether that is clear grounds for redundancy, and, if that is the case what will I need to produce at tribunal to aid my case?

The difficulty you have is that an obligation to pay redundancy pay only arises if you were "dismissed", so you run into the same issues.

There is no formal redundancy consultation obligation if the employer is making less than 20 people redundant within a 90 day period.

There would still be an obligation to follow a fair procedure in all cases, but difficult to see how that could be enforced except by a claim for constructive (unfair) dismissal.

nicechap

Les79 wrote: »

I think I've queried this before, but could you clarify where you get this figure from? Or the rationale behind it if you are estimating?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49024243

Hope this helps

nicechap

Les79 wrote: »

1. It is a news article! Hardly a reliable source for any percentages!

2. There is NO MENTION of the 3% figure in the link!

(so the double facepalm is apt)

If you think the BBC are lying do complain to their regulator.

As your google seems to be out of date, fill your boots looking though the raw data, and be sure to take out cases of unauthorised deductions.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

robatwork

That BBC article was awful.

There was no conclusion to the ET of "Paul".
Didn't see anything that alluded to 3%.

In reality, specious claims from employees are common as they get a free hit in an ET. This devalues those bringing genuine discrimination or unfair dismissal claims, and clogs up the ETs.

The results of specific ETs are also available to anyone, but sadly most are settled in such a way it can't be seen whether it's an out of court deal or the case was withdrawn because the litigant didn't pursue it or turn up.

steampowered

robatwork wrote: »

In reality, specious claims from employees are common as they get a free hit in an ET. This devalues those bringing genuine discrimination or unfair dismissal claims, and clogs up the ETs.

The results of specific ETs are also available to anyone, but sadly most are settled in such a way it can't be seen whether it's an out of court deal or the case was withdrawn because the litigant didn't pursue it or turn up.

Do you have any evidence for this or particular experience of employment tribunals?

It is nonsense that spurious claims get a free hit. The ET can and does order Claimants who bring spurious claims to pay the legal costs of their employer.