Constructive dismissal: Claimant employed as football coach and was appointed manager/head coach of U19’s team. He was told, without any discussion or consultation, that the subsequently appointed Academy Director would be responsible for picking the U19 team, a matter which would also have had significant consequential effects on the Claimant’s role. The Claimant having resigned as a result, claimed unfair constructive dismissal. Employment Tribunal held ...
|
Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity: The claimant was dismissed for failing to tell the police the whereabouts of his brother after a warrant for his arrest had been issued. The Tribunal found that he had been dismissed unfairly for two main reasons: 1) the claimant was employed by Strathclyde Joint Police Board and as such he owed no duties to Strathclyde Police Force; 2) the respondent had no reasonable grounds for its belief that the claimant had committed an act of miscon ...
|
Unfair Dismissal: The claimant, a trainee, was made redundant in circumstances where it was agreed there was a genuine redundancy situation. However, the claimant had no warning of his impending redundancy, he was dismissed at a meeting with immediate effect, he was not advised of his right to appeal, he was not told he was entitled to have a witness at the meeting and he was not given any explanation of the reasons for his redundancy. Further, no consideration was given to the question of ...
|
Unfair Dismissal: The claimant, an Advisory Service Manager, was a long standing employee of the respondent. The DWP policy stated that the staff must not use their positions to help friends, family or acquaintances. The claimant was dismissed following an investigation into the help the claimant gave to a friend of her daughter. The Tribunal found that she had been unfairly dismissed because the dismissal fell outside the band of reasonable responses, applying their own subjective judgeme ...
|
Striking-out/dismissal: The claimant, a bus driver, was dismissed following an incident in which he crashed the bus into a bridge. He claimed that he had been unfairly dismissed pointing to i) not having had access to evidence that his employers had gathered; ii) their failure to follow up matters raised in the disciplinary process; iii) his belief that he was not wholly to blame for the accident because he had not adequately been advised of a change of route; iv) his belief that the ...
|
Retirement: The claimant requested that he work for another two years following his 65th birthday. The respondent rejected his request. The Tribunal held that the dismissal was unfair on the basis that the managers in question regarded themselves as absolutely bound by a company policy against granting extensions; accordingly the request had not been genuinely considered as required by paragraph 6 of schedule 6 of the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. The claimant was awarde ...
|
Equal Pay Act: The two claimants’ and their comparator’s contracts were transferred to Scottish Enterprise and subsequently to the respondent, both transfers being subject to TUPE. It was agreed that all three jobs were of equal value for the purposes of s1 of the Equal Pay Act. On transfer to Scottish Enterprise in 2002, the claimants’ salaries were roughly £10,000 less than that of their comparator and this continued to be the case until the claims were presen ...
|
Preliminary issues: The claimant claimed unfair dismissal and race discrimination. The ET decided at a pre-hearing review that the race discrimination claim was out of time, but the unfair dismissal was in time and therefore they had jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The judgment was given orally and expressed in writing under Rule 28. In light of issues which were thrown up in another case, the EJ decided to review her judgment a few months later, but did not actually alter her dec ...
|
Race Discrimination: The claimant claimed that she had been subjected to race discrimination and harassment on grounds of her nationality and/or national origins. The Tribunal upheld 5 of her 24 claims, concluding that treatment had the effect of creating a humiliating, degrading and offensive environment for the claimant, allegations of harassment had been established and the respondent had not established the reason for the less favourable treatment was not discriminatory. The respo ...
|
Race Discrimination: The claimant and his wife, who were both Muslims, brought claims against the respondent when they were both interviewed for, but not offered, jobs in a bakery. The respondent failed to reply to statutory questionnaires served by the claimant and his wife, saying they were too busy. The claimant's wife claimed race and religious discrimination. Her claim of race discrimination was dismissed, the Tribunal saying that there was no evidence to indicate that she was be ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |