Ms M Stronach v Bristol Street Fourth Investments Ltd: 2500127/2022
JUDGMENT
[1]The claimant’s claim of automatic unfair dismissal under s103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (for making a protected disclosure) is well founded and succeeds.[2]The respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant compensation for unfair dismissal in the sum of £5085.20. This is a compensatory award representing 52 weeks’ loss of earnings comprised of 8 weeks x £446.72, 34 weeks x £38.71 and 10 weeks x £19.53.[3]The claimant was subjected to unlawful public interest disclosure detriments by: 23/9/21 and 24/9/21 Lee Stewart permitting Gemma Winter to work in the back office leaving the claimant to man the service desk alone; Case No. 2500127/2022 23/9/21 Lee Stewart asking the claimant whether she wanted to remain at the respondent; 23/9/21 Lee Stewart telling the claimant “after this it will be very hard for you to progress anywhere in Bristol Street”; 23/9/21 Lee Stewart telling the claimant that she was “not the right person for the role”; 25/9/21 the claimant being invited to a probation review meeting to review her employment; 25/9/21 Lee Stewart telling the claimant that it was highly probable her employment would be terminated at the probation review meeting. Accordingly the claimant’s claim she was subjected to public interest disclosure detriments succeeds in part.[4]The respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant compensation in the sum of £5,000 for injury to feelings.[5]All other claims of public interest disclosure detriments fail and are dismissed. Note: This has been a remote hearing. The parties did not object to the case being heard remotely. The form of remote hearing was V - video. It was not practicable to hold a face to face hearing because of the Covid19 pandemic and all issues could be determined in a remote hearing.