What was it about?
Constructive unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, disability discrimination, unpaid wages, failure to provide employment particulars
What was the outcome?
When considering the constructive unfair dismissal claim, the Tribunal noted that there had been instances where the Respondent had destroyed the relationship of trust and confidence between the parties. Specifically, a public berating, rescinding of a pay rise, and refusal to pay due to no timesheets. The Tribunal also noted that the Claimant had resigned directly concerning those breaches. The Claimant mentioned the non-payment of wages in his resignation letter and did not wave the breach. As such, the claim for constructive unfair dismissal was upheld.
It should be noted that compensation was reduced by 40% due to the Claimant’s conduct. As such, the compensation awarded was £4,213.44.
The Claimant was off sick during what would have been his notice period. Because he did not have contractual sick pay, the Tribunal did not make an award for wrongful dismissal as he wouldn’t have received wages during this period in any event and therefore had not suffered a loss.
Concerning the discrimination claim, the Claimant stated the Respondent prevented him from taking appropriate breaks from work or meal breaks. He claimed this put him at a disadvantage due to his Asperger’s Syndrome and diabetes. However, the Tribunal did not find any evidence that the Claimant was prevented from taking breaks and would often self-schedule his work. So, the Tribunal held that the Respondent did not disadvantage the Claimant due to his disability.
The Tribunal upheld the payment of wages claim, as the contract provided a minimum of 38 hours of work per week. The Tribunal disagreed that timesheets must be submitted to be paid – they were only required to be paid overtime.
In relation to the statement of employment terms, whilst it did appear to have been drafted, the Respondent did not supply the Claimant a copy. The Tribunal noted that whilst this was a breach of the law, it appeared to be a genuine oversight and did not award compensation.
What were the facts?
The Claimant was an engineer fixing pinball machines and betting terminals. The Respondent provided him with a new contract that guaranteed him a minimum of 38 hours of work each week. There was a disagreement whether the new contract required the Claimant to provide timesheets to be paid for all work or only to be paid overtime. As a result, disagreements occurred between the Claimant and Respondent regarding the provision of timesheets, ending in a manager of the Respondent publicly berating the Claimant.
After this, the Claimant said he was considering resigning, but further conversations about timesheets occurred before he was signed off with work-related stress for four weeks.
The Respondent later contacted JACS for assistance, who recommended they speak with Autism Jersey for advice and to put together a plan to get the Claimant back to work.
The Respondent visited the Claimant on the same day and suggested that he look for another job. A few days later, the Claimant resigned, stating his reasons as disability discrimination in relation to his diabetes and Asperger’s Syndrome, no written contract, and unpaid wages.
