Long-serving teacher unfairly dismissed after raising race discrimination grievance
A primary school teacher with 19 years' service was unfairly dismissed for 'irretrievable breakdown' after she raised a grievance alleging race discrimination. The tribunal also found she was victimised.
1 min read · Last updated 19 May 2026
Case details
- #long-service
- #race-discrimination
- #victimisation
- #counter-grievance
- #sosr-dismissal
- #notice-pay
Key facts
- The claimant was a teacher at Kings Road Primary School from 1 September 2001 until her dismissal on 28 February 2022.
- On 1 July 2019, six members of the Senior Leadership Team lodged a collective grievance against the claimant alleging intimidating and unreasonable behaviour.
- The claimant lodged a counter-grievance on 7 October 2019 alleging race discrimination and victimisation.
- An investigation by Lauren Long concluded there was an irretrievable breakdown in working relationships and recommended dismissal.
- The dismissal panel chaired by Mr Martin dismissed the claimant on 28 February 2022 for some other substantial reason (irretrievable breakdown).
- The tribunal found the dismissal was unfair and that the claimant was victimised because of her protected act.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Ms Mairs began working as a teacher at Kings Road Primary School.
-
SLT grievance lodged
Six members of the Senior Leadership Team submitted a collective grievance against the claimant, alleging intimidating and unreasonable behaviour.
-
Claimant's counter-grievance
The claimant lodged a grievance alleging race discrimination and victimisation by the SLT.
-
Hanif investigation report
Investigator Mr Hanif published his report, finding the claimant's grievance was made in bad faith and recommending a conduct investigation and mediation.
-
SLT letters refusing to work with claimant
Six SLT members sent letters stating they could not work with the claimant if she returned from sickness absence.
-
Claimant suspended
The claimant was suspended by Chair of Governors Mr O'Keefe due to an alleged irretrievable breakdown in working relationships.
-
Long investigation report
Lauren Long concluded there was an irretrievable breakdown and recommended dismissal.
-
Dismissal hearing
A panel chaired by Mr Martin held a dismissal hearing. The claimant was represented by her union.
-
Dismissal letter sent
The claimant was dismissed with notice, effective 30 April 2022, for some other substantial reason (irretrievable breakdown).
-
Appeal lodged
The claimant appealed her dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for 'some other substantial reason' (irretrievable breakdown) and whether she was victimised because she raised a grievance alleging race discrimination.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, race discrimination by victimisation, and unlawful deduction from wages (notice pay).
The key reasons were:
- The school failed to properly consider alternatives to dismissal, such as mediation or redeployment.
- The investigation into the breakdown was influenced by the claimant's protected act (her grievance), amounting to victimisation.
- The dismissal was procedurally flawed and outside the range of reasonable responses.
Compensation will be determined at a separate remedy hearing. A Polkey reduction of 33% was applied, meaning there was a chance the claimant would have been dismissed even with a fair process.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should explore all alternatives, such as mediation or redeployment, before dismissing for irretrievable breakdown, especially with long-serving employees.
- Raising a discrimination grievance is a protected act; any subsequent detrimental treatment can amount to victimisation.
- A flawed investigation that fails to consider the employee's perspective can render a dismissal unfair.
- Long service (19 years) strengthens the expectation that the employer will act reasonably and consider alternatives.
When a grievance backfires
This case shows how a workplace dispute can spiral when a grievance alleging discrimination is met with a counter-grievance and, ultimately, dismissal. The claimant, a primary school teacher with 19 years' service, was dismissed after six senior colleagues complained about her behaviour. She had previously raised a grievance alleging race discrimination and victimisation.
What went wrong
The school's investigation concluded there was an irretrievable breakdown in relationships. But the tribunal found that the investigation was flawed: it did not properly consider the claimant's side of the story or explore alternatives like mediation. Crucially, the decision to dismiss was influenced by the claimant's protected act—her race discrimination grievance. That made the dismissal both unfair and an act of victimisation.
What the employer could have done differently
The school could have taken a more balanced approach. Instead of accepting the senior leadership team's refusal to work with the claimant, it should have investigated the underlying issues, considered mediation, and looked at redeployment. A fair process would have given the claimant a genuine opportunity to respond and might have avoided dismissal altogether.
Why this matters
For employees, this case is a reminder that raising a discrimination grievance is a protected act. Any negative treatment that follows—including dismissal—can be challenged as victimisation. For employers, it highlights the importance of fair procedures and considering all options before dismissing for irretrievable breakdown, particularly when the employee has long service and the breakdown stems from a protected act.
Similar cases
Flexible working dispute: some discrimination claims survive strike-out
A former Marks and Spencer employee had several claims struck out due to lack of reasonable prospect of success, but race and religion discrimination claims survive subject to small deposits.
Social worker's race discrimination claim over 'aggressive' stereotype dismissed
A black social worker with 15 years' service lost her claims of race discrimination and constructive dismissal after an altercation with a white colleague. The tribunal found no evidence of stereotyping or unfair treatment.
HR Business Partner dismissed after one month for whistleblowing: £74,540 awarded
An HR Business Partner who raised concerns about a flawed redundancy process was dismissed after just one month. The tribunal awarded £74,540 after striking out the employer's response.
Labourer's race discrimination claim survives strike-out bid despite late witness statement
A construction labourer who alleges he was subjected to monkey chants and racist abuse can proceed with his claim after the tribunal refused to strike it out, despite his late compliance with orders.