A recent decision of the Employment Tribunal highlights that even what could be considered as a small or trivial change to working arrangements needs to be handled with sensitivity and care in order to avoid unfair constructive dismissal claims.

Background

Mr Walker began employment as a branch manager at Robsons Estate Agents in Rickmansworth from 2017. In February 2022, he was informed by the Company Director, Mr Young, that he would be moved to a branch in Chorleywood to accommodate a new recruit, Mr Rosenthal, who was described as “too good to miss out on.” Mr Walker was disappointed with this move as this branch was quieter and less successful. His original commission structure included earnings from Rickmansworth’s turnover, as well as commission for sales at Chorleywood. However, in May 2023 he received a contract amendment which confirmed that he would no longer receive any commission related to Rickmansworth. After expressing his disappointment, he was told to ignore the amendment, as Mr Rosenthal had resigned.

Discussions then arose regarding the vacant manager position at Rickmansworth. Mr Young initially considered internal candidate, Mr Gooder, but later decided to hire an external candidate, Ms Withers. During the hiring period, Mr Young planned to split the managerial role at Rickmansworth between him and Mr Gooder without informing Mr Walker, and Mr Walker was to handle higher value sales. Additionally, Mr Gooder took over the desk traditionally used by the branch manager at the back of the office, a move considered to have symbolic significance by the Tribunal. When Mr Walker questioned this, he was told via WhatsApp by Mr Gooder that he would be sitting in the middle of the office.

A confrontation followed, during which Mr Young expressed disbelief that a “53-year-old man” would make a fuss about a desk. Mr Walker threatened to resign, and Mr Young responded in a manner that the Tribunal found to be encouraging him into following through. When Mr Walker resigned, Mr Young immediately asked him to put it into writing and leave the premises. A subsequent attempt by Mr Walker to resolve this situation was ignored.

Decision

The Tribunal ruled that Mr Walker was constructively unfairly dismissed due to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence. The Tribunal found that:

• The lack of clear communication regarding Mr Walker upon returning to Rickmansworth contributed to a breakdown of trust.

• Moving to a middle desk symbolised a demotion, reinforcing Mr Walker’s perception that he had lost status.

• Mr Young’s reaction to Mr Walker’s concerns and his immediate push for a written resignation further demonstrated a breach of mutual trust and confidence.

• While Mr Young’s reference to Mr Walker’s age was inappropriate, it was not deemed to be a discriminatory factor leading to his resignation.

The Tribunal concluded that Mr Walker had resigned in response to these breaches, making his constructive dismissal claim valid. However, his age discrimination claim was dismissed. A remedy hearing will determine the compensation he is entitled to receive.

Lessons for Employers

This case highlights the importance of clear communication and proper handling of role transitions. Employers should consider the symbolic and practical implications of workplace changes, as even small gestures such as desk assignments can impact employee morale and perceived status.

Additionally, abrupt responses to employee grievances, particularly those perceived as coercion into resignation, can be seen as a breach of trust. Employers should foster open dialogue to prevent claims of constructive dismissal and ensure decisions regarding job roles are well communicated and transparent.

How we can help

For further information, or to discuss the issues raised within this case, please contact us to speak to a member of our Employment Team.