Logistics Operative Succeeds in Post-Termination Victimisation Complaint

Victimisation of workers does not necessarily come to an end with the termination of their employment. The point was made by the case of a logistics operative who was labelled a troublemaker by a member of his former employer’s senior management team.

Whilst working for his former…

Oct 07, 2022

Adrian sulyok scznlg6rrhq unsplash 1024x683

Whilst working for his former employer, the operative, who suffered from anxiety and depression, lodged a grievance and issued an Employment Tribunal (ET) complaint of disability discrimination. Both those steps were agreed to be protected acts. Following settlement negotiations, his employment was terminated on agreed terms. He withdrew the ET claim after receiving a sum of money.

He later found employment as an agency worker at a logistics plant. His former employer was that plant’s principal customer. After his placement at the plant was terminated, he launched ET proceedings against his former employer asserting that the loss of his job was a direct consequence of his protected acts a year earlier.

Upholding his post-termination victimisation complaint, the ET found that one of his former employer’s senior managers had instructed the plant to terminate his agency contract. At the relevant time, the manager was fully aware of the operative’s history and had described him as a troublemaker to one of the plant’s personnel.

The ET found that the manager had issued the instruction because of the operative’s protected acts. The operative was well-regarded at the plant and any reasonable worker would consider the summary termination of his placement there as a detriment. If not agreed, the amount of his compensation would be determined at a further hearing.

School Inspector Sacked for Touching Pupil Succeeds in Unfair Dismissal Claim

It is obviously impractical for employers to have in place disciplinary policies that set out each and every form of frowned-upon conduct. However, as an Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) ruling showed, employees are generally entitled to some forewarning of the types of behaviour that may result in immediate dismissal. The case involved a school inspector who, during an inspection visit, encountered a group of pupils who had come in soaking from the rain. He brushed water from the hair or…

Pregnancy ‘Played a Part’ in Redundancy Decision – Discrimination Ruling

Maternity leave is every expectant mother’s entitlement and, if you feel that you have suffered pregnancy discrimination, you should contact a solicitor without delay. The point was powerfully made by the case of a woman whose pregnancy played a part in her employer’s decision to make her redundant. Having twice become pregnant, the woman took successive periods of maternity leave which together lasted over two years. Not long after returning to work, she became pregnant for a third time and…

There’s a Big Difference Between Assertive Management and Bullying

There is all the difference in the world between an assertive management style and one that descends into aggressive bullying. As an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling showed, employers who fail to take effective steps to stamp out the latter behaviour expose themselves to severe reputational and financial consequences. The case focused on the stormy relationship between a charity employee and her line manager. Matters came to a head at a meeting when the line manager was seen to become…