Working Time – Shop Worker’s Automatic Unfair Dismissal Claim Upheld

If you have been sacked for asserting your statutory rights, an employment lawyer will see to it that you are justly compensated. The point was powerfully made by the case of a retail sales assistant who complained that, by instructing her to work on 14 consecutive days, her employer was…

Sep 07, 2021

The woman was very upset when her employer asked her to work continuously for a fortnight whilst her manager was on holiday. No satisfactory solution was found and the employer refused to engage temporary staff to provide cover. She worked the hours, as instructed, and was given notice of termination of her employment two days after the manager returned from leave.

After she launched proceedings, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found that, prior to her manager going on holiday, she had made a valid assertion that the employer’s instruction that she work 14 days on the trot breached her rights under Regulation 11 of the Working Time Regulations 1998.

However, the ET dismissed her claim that she had been automatically unfairly dismissed for asserting a statutory right, contrary to Section 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It did so on the basis that, when she made the assertion, the alleged breach of her rights was only anticipated or threatened.

Upholding her challenge to that outcome, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that, in order for her claim to succeed, it was not necessary for her to have worked the instructed hours prior to making the assertion. It was the employer’s instruction itself that was alleged to have infringed her rights and her assertion thus fell within the ambit of Section 104.

She had made the assertion in good faith and it did not matter whether it was well-founded. The ET had made a clear finding that her complaint about her working hours was the principal reason for her dismissal. In the circumstances, the EAT substituted a finding that her dismissal was automatically unfair. The amount of her compensation would be assessed at a further hearing, if not agreed.

Discriminatory Treatment Can Result in Costly Damage to Mental Health

Failing to take appropriate care when it comes to the mental health of employees can not only result in falling foul of employment law; it also comes with a risk of personal injury being inflicted. This was evidenced in an Employment Tribunal (ET) case brought by a woman whose mental health was broken down by the discriminatory treatment she endured from her employer. The woman was employed by a barrister, variously as a virtual legal assistant, personal assistant and office manager, for a…

Workplace Relationships Broken Down? Always Avoid a Knee-Jerk Response

Where irresolvable differences of opinion render an employment relationship entirely unworkable, dismissal may be justified. However, as one case showed, a knee-jerk response is never wise and a failure to allow time for reflection and the observance of proper procedures is likely to have serious financial consequences. The case concerned the chief operating officer and founder of a technology company whose relationship with his co-founders had become so strained that a psychologist…

Social Worker’s Anxiety at Prospect of Attending Court Ruled a Disability

Activities that some people might find unconcerning can, for others, be a source of anxiety amounting to a full-blown disability. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in the case of a senior social worker who found the prospect of attending court hearings deeply disturbing. The woman, who dealt with many difficult matters involving children, had in the past attended a court hearing during which she was the subject of judicial criticism. She described the experience as traumatic.…