Miss M Ibrahim v Securitas Security Services (UK) Ltd: 4116438/2018
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Employment Tribunal is that the claimant`s complaint(s) of(a) unfair dismissal(b) breach of contract(c) failure to supply statement of employment particulars succeed. The remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a hearing.REASONS
[1]A copy of the claim form setting out the claimant`s complaint(s) was sent to the respondent on 27 August 2018.[2]In accordance with the terms of Rule 16 of the Rules to be found in Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 the respondent was required to enter a response within twenty eight days of the date on which a copy of the claim was sent to it/him/her but failed to do so.[3]The Employment Judge decided that on the available material a determination could properly be made without a hearing as to the liability of the respondent for the claim but not in respect of the remedy.[4]The remedy to which the claimant is entitled for the claim will be determined by an Employment Judge at a hearing. Employment Judge: Robert Gall Date of Judgment: 08 October 2018 Entered in register: 08 October 2018 And copied to parties EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4116438/2018 Held in Glasgow on 30 November & 14 December 2018 Employment Judge Shona MacLean Claimant Represented by: Mr Mullen Solicitor Miss M Ibrahim Respondent No appearance and not represented Securitas Security Services (UK) Limited[1]On 8 October 2018 in accordance with Rule 21 of the Rules to be found in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Employment Judge Gall issued a judgment that the claimant’s complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract and failure to supply a statement of employment particulars succeed (the original decision). The remedy was to be determined at a hearing on 30 November 201 8.[2]I conducted the hearing on 30 November 201 8 at which the claimant was present. Mr Mullen represented her. There was no attendance by or for the respondent.[3]I was satisfied that in the claim form there were no complaints of breach of contract and failure to supply written terms and conditions. There was a complaint under Regulation 15 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) which was on the available material well founded.[4]The hearing was continued until 14 December 2018 to allow the claimant to apply for reconsideration and to clarify her schedule of loss. The claimant did so in an email sent on 12 December 2018 which was copied to the respondent.[5]As it was not practicable for Employment Judge Gall to consider the application for reconsideration, the Vice President appointed me to so do. In the circumstances and in the absence of any comments or objections from the respondent I proceeded to deal with the issues on paper.[6]In the interest of justice, it was appropriate for me to vary the original decision by deleting reference to complaints of breach of contract and failure to supply written terms and conditions and substituting that the complaint under Regulation 15 of the TUPE is well founded.[7]I then went onto consider the remedy to be awarded.[8]In relation to the unfair dismissal complaint, at termination the claimant was 32 years of age. She was continuously employed for 10 years. She earned £192.72 gross per week. Her net weekly wage was £189.03.[9]I calculated the basic award at ten weeks’ pay at £1 92.72, that is £1 ,927.20.[10]Turing to the compensatory award, the claimant’s loss of wages from termination to the date of the hearing was 28 weeks’ pay at £189.03, that is £5,292. 1added to this £300 for loss off statutory rights giving a total of £5,592. From this total I deducted salary received from her new employment of £1 ,909.75 leaving a compensatory award of £3,682.25. 1 1 . The claimant was not in receipt of any benefits so the Employment Protection (Recruitment of Jobseekers Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996 do not apply. The total monetary award is £5,609.45 (£1,927.20 plus £3,682.25).[12]Turning to the Regulation 15 complaint, I was satisfied that the maximum figure should be awarded: 13 weeks’ gross pay, that is £2,496.[13]This was based on the length of time during which the respondent was aware of the cessation of the contract on which the claimant’s employment depended. The respondent knew in December 2017 that the claimant’s employment would come to an end but there was no consultation before she was dismissed on 17 May 2018. There was a complete and deliberate failure to consult.[14]The respondent has provided no mitigating circumstances justifying any reduction in the award. Employment Judge: S Maclean Date of Judgment: 14 December 2018 Entered in register: 18 December 2018 and copied to parties E.T. Z4 (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 4116438/2018 Employment Judge Shona MacLean Miss M Ibrahim Claimant Securitas Security Services (UK) Ltd Respondent