Ms J Osei v St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: 2304062/2023
JUDGMENT
The unanimous Judgment of the Employment Tribunal is as follows:[1]The complaints of direct race, age and religion/belief discrimination are not well founded and are dismissed;[2]The complaints of harassment related to race, age and religion/belief are not well founded and are dismissed;[3]The complaints of damages for breach of contract are not well founded and are dismissed;[4]The claim is therefore dismissed. Employment Judge Tsamados Date: 7 November 2024 Judgment sent to the parties on Date: 8 November 2024 Case No: 2304062/2023 Note Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. Public access to Employment Tribunal Judgments All judgments and written reasons for the judgments are published online shortly after a copy has been sent to the Claimant(s) and Respondent(s) in a case. They can be found at: www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions. Recording and Transcription Please note that if a Tribunal hearing has been recorded you may request a transcript of the recording, for which a charge may be payable. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings, and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here: https://www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation-practicedirect. Case Number: 2304062/23 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Josephine Osei Respondent: St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Heard at: London South (by CVC) On: 20 February 2024 Before: Employment Judge G Phillips Appearances For the claimant: in person For the respondent: Ms Y Aboud, solicitorREASONS
[1]The Claimant was employed by the Respondent NHS Trust from June 2022 until July 2023, as an Employment Relations Manager. The Claimant said that she had been working in the Employment Relations department at the Respondent Hospital, on a fixed term contract, when she was told that she would have to reapply for her role.[2]On 20 October 2023, the London South Employment Tribunal, on the instructions of Employment Judge Cawthray, wrote to the Claimant to explain that under s 108 Employment Rights Act, two years’ service was required in order to bring an unfair dismissal complaint, and that it appeared from her ET1 claim form that she was employed for less than two years. It was explained that if this was correct, the tribunal would not be able to hear the Claimant’s unfair dismissal complaint. The Claimant was given 7 days to give reasons why her complaint of unfair dismissal should not be struck out. No response was received to this letter.[3]On 2 November 2023, the Respondent’s solicitors wrote to the tribunal to ask that the Claimant’s unfair dismissal claim be struck out. Case Number: 2304062/23[4]At the Case Management hearing on 20 February 2024, the Claimant acknowledged that she had received the communication set out above and said she hoped to be able to deal with this matter at this hearing.[5]The Claimant confirmed that while she had continuous service within the NHS going back some 9 years, she did not have 2 years continuous service with the Respondent. Ms Aboud for the Respondent confirmed that, while continuous service does count within the NHS towards some benefits, it does not accumulate from one trust to another, so she said the Claimant did not have the requisite two year’s continuous service with this Respondent. The Claimant did not challenge the position advanced by the Respondent.Conclusion.
[6]Section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have not less than two years continuous service to make an unfair dismissal complaint. It is not disputed that the Claimant was employed by the Respondent for less than two years. Therefore, the Claimant is not entitled to bring such a complaint.[7]On that basis, as the Claimant does not have the requisite 2 years’ continuous service with the Respondent, the tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear her complaint of unfair dismissal, and it is accordingly struck out.[8]The Claimant’s other complaints are not affected by this judgment.