Miss F Rollo v The Northumbria Community Rehabilitation Company Ltd: 2501344/2017
JUDGMENT
[1]The respondent shall pay to the claimant compensation for unfair dismissal in the sum of £3,015.59.[2]The claimant shall pay to the respondent a contribution to costs in the sum of £200.00.REASONS
[1]This remedies hearing is to determine the remedies to be awarded to the claimant for unfair dismissal. The claim was initially contested but subsequently the respondent conceded liability on the issue of unfair dismissal.[2]I have had the opportunity of reading the claim form and response form which set out the basis of the case. A bundle of documents was prepared for the remedies hearing and this made reference to but did not include all of the documentation which led up to the departure of the claimant from her employment with the respondent and dealing with issues as to redundancy, transfer of undertakings and possible severance agreements.[3]Within the remedies bundle there were schedules of loss prepared by the claimant who assessed her losses at £2,700 (compensatory award of £2,200 plus loss of statutory rights figure of £500). The respondent’s calculation was 1SN-2664521_1 £3,115. This took into account a basic award of the same figure of £2,200.50 and a compensatory award of £715.09.[4]At the outset Mr Ryan conceded that figures in the respondent’s schedule were inaccurate. The respondent had been basing their calculation on a loss of statutory rights figure of £300 as opposed to £500 advanced by the claimant. For the purposes of this hearing Mr Ryan indicated that the respondent would be prepared to put the loss of statutory rights figure at £400.[5]The respondent was also suggesting that there should be a 25% reduction in the claimant’s award based upon a failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice. Taking these calculations into account this meant that the respondent’s calculation of the total award was as follows: Basic award £2,200.50 Compensatory award Partial loss of earnings £ 415.09 Loss of statutory rights £ 400.00 £ 815.09 Total £3,015.59 Less 25% £ 753.89 Respondent’s calculation £2,261.70[6]The claimant gave evidence supported by a statement on remedies but on the basis of this maintained her figure of £2,700 as her claim. However, she mentioned two other issues. Firstly, she stated that although the post which she is working on for Capita through Nigel Wright Agency was on a higher salary, this was due to end on 31 May 2019 and it was possible that it may not continue. However, on being questioned she confirmed that it probably would continue. Secondly, she now had a concern as to her health and produced a letter dated 19 April 2018 from a consultant at the Freeman Hospital indicating that she was to attend for an MRI scan to investigate right sided hearing decrease which has occurred over the past year. She mentioned concerns that this might be a tumour but at the present time this is only an investigation. She said that she is a single parent of a nine year old son. If she had still been in employment with the respondent then she would have had cover for sick pay and a death in service award entitlement. However, she conceded that at the present time this is only a medical investigation. The point was also made that this was not an issue at the time when the remedies hearing had originally been listed on 28 February 2018, that hearing having been postponed due to adverse weather conditions.[7]Mr Ryan for the respondent advanced the case that there should be a 25% reduction although it was clear that all of the documentation in relation to the history of the case, there not having been a liability hearing, was not available to the Tribunal although it was listed as 44 separate pieces of evidence which had been in the bundle for what was originally to be a three day hearing on liability. 2SN-2664521_1Findings
[8]The basic award for unfair dismissal is an arithmetical calculation which was agreed between the parties as £2,200.50. Loss of earnings[9]Compensatory award It was agreed between the parties that the claimant had suffered a loss of 12 weeks net earnings from NWES and that the figure for this net loss is £415.09. Loss of statutory rights I find that the appropriate figure for this is £400. Reduction for failure to comply with the ACAS Code On the evidence presented to me I do not find that there is any basis for making such an award. The claimant described that she had been involved in numerous meetings over a five month period in which she had put forward a case as to how she was being treated in relation to her post and the possibility of her being offered redundancy or severance or a TUPE transfer to Salford. In the event the stance taken by the respondent was announced at a very late stage and the claimant was only informed of this a number of days before her employment was to end and she had felt no option but to resign on the basis of a fundamental repudiatory breach of contract. On the basis of the evidence which I have heard and the accounts within the claim form and response document, I do not find any grounds for making a reduction. Accordingly the total compensation to be awarded to the claimant for unfair dismissal is as follows: Basic award £2,200.00 Compensatory award £ 815.09 TOTAL COMPENSATION £3,015.59 Costs[10]Mr Ryan made an application for the claimant to be ordered to pay towards the respondent’s costs. He made reference to offers which had been advanced to the claimant including an offer to pay £3,115 on 20 February 2018 and similar sums. Accordingly the claimant could have received a higher figure than awarded by the Tribunal and she should therefore be ordered to pay towards the claimant’s costs incurred for today’s hearing.[11]In response the claimant argued that she had not had the opportunity of having her say and placing on record how badly she felt she had been treated by the respondent over a lengthy period. She had not incurred legal costs herself for the remedies hearing as she felt that she could not afford to do so. However, on the basis of what she said she wished to have a remedies hearing on a matter of principle. 3SN-2664521_1[12]She confirmed the earnings she continues to receive in her post and I take into account her ability to pay costs.[13]My decision with regard to costs is that, doing justice between the parties, it is appropriate that the claimant should make a contribution towards the costs of the respondent for the remedies hearing. She was offered a higher sum than she achieved within the hearing. The appropriate figure for the claimant to contribute to the respondent’s costs is £200 and I have made an order in that sum. EMPLOYMENT JUDGE SPEKER OBE DL