Payroll supervisor with 19 years' service dismissed for refusing new reporting structure: unfair dismissal claim fails
A payroll supervisor with 19 years' service was fairly dismissed for refusing to accept a new reporting structure and for capability issues, the Watford Employment Tribunal has ruled. Her claims of unfair dismissal and associative disability discrimination were rejected.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #associative-disability-discrimination
- #capability-procedure
- #performance-management
- #settlement-offer
- #appeal-process
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from June 1999 to 15 May 2018 as a Payroll Supervisor.
- She received three consecutive performance reviews rated 'requires improvement' between 2016 and 2017.
- Her father was diagnosed with stage IV cancer in January 2018, which she disclosed to her line manager Steve Young.
- She was issued a verbal warning on 14 February 2018 for performance issues.
- On 28 March 2018, she was offered a settlement agreement and told to take time off; she did not return to work.
- She was dismissed on 15 May 2018 for refusal to report to the Payroll Manager and capability issues.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for the respondent as an Accounting Assistant.
-
Promoted to Payroll Supervisor
Claimant was promoted to Payroll Supervisor, managing a team.
-
Performance review 'requires improvement'
Mr Young gave the claimant an overall rating of 'requires improvement'.
-
Annual performance review 'requires improvement'
The claimant's annual review again rated 'requires improvement' with detailed criticisms.
-
Performance review 'requires improvement'
Third consecutive review rating 'requires improvement'.
-
Father's illness disclosed
Claimant informed Mr Young that her father was ill.
-
Father diagnosed with cancer
Claimant learned her father had stage IV cancer and informed Mr Young.
-
Invitation to formal hearing
Claimant received a letter inviting her to a disciplinary hearing about performance.
-
Formal hearing
Meeting held to discuss performance issues; claimant did not mention her father's illness.
-
Verbal warning issued
Claimant was given a verbal warning for poor performance.
-
Settlement offer and exclusion
Claimant was offered a settlement agreement, told to take time off, and her keys were taken.
-
Invitation to dismissal hearing
Claimant received a letter inviting her to a disciplinary hearing for insubordination and capability.
-
Dismissal hearing
Claimant attended the hearing without a companion; she was dismissed.
-
Dismissal effective
Claimant's employment terminated with 12 weeks' pay in lieu of notice.
-
Appeal hearing
Appeal heard by Mr Bateh; appeal rejected.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented her claim to the Employment Tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the dismissal was unfair and whether the claimant was subjected to associative disability discrimination because of her father's cancer. The key question was whether the employer's reason for dismissal was genuine and whether the process was fair.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's refusal to accept the new reporting structure (some other substantial reason), and that capability concerns were also a factor. The process was deemed fair, with the employer giving warnings and an opportunity to improve. The associative disability discrimination claim failed because the claimant did not show that her father's disability influenced the decision; the employer was unaware of the extent of her caring responsibilities and the treatment was not because of the disability.
Lessons & takeaways
- Long service does not guarantee protection if you refuse to accept reasonable management changes.
- If you have caring responsibilities, make sure your employer knows the full extent so they can consider adjustments.
- A settlement offer does not automatically make a later dismissal unfair; it can be a genuine attempt to resolve issues.
- Three consecutive 'requires improvement' ratings can justify capability proceedings, even for a long-serving employee.
A long-serving employee's refusal to accept change
This case shows that even 19 years of loyal service does not give an employee the right to refuse a reasonable management restructure. The claimant, a payroll supervisor, was unhappy about reporting to a new manager after a reorganisation. She made her objections clear and, when the employer insisted, she effectively refused to comply. The tribunal accepted that this was a genuine 'some other substantial reason' for dismissal.
What the employer did right
Enterprise Rent-A-Car followed a structured process. It gave the claimant three consecutive 'requires improvement' performance ratings before any formal action. It issued a verbal warning, offered a settlement agreement (which the claimant rejected), and then held a dismissal hearing. The tribunal noted that the employer considered alternatives but concluded that the claimant's refusal to accept the reporting line made the working relationship untenable. The appeal was also properly considered.
Why the discrimination claim failed
The claimant argued that she was treated less favourably because of her father's cancer (associative disability discrimination). However, the tribunal found that the employer's decision-makers were not aware of the full extent of her caring responsibilities at the time of the key decisions. The treatment was about her performance and refusal to accept change, not because of her father's disability. The claim therefore failed.
What this means for similar cases
Employees who refuse to accept reasonable management changes risk dismissal, even with long service. Employers should ensure they follow a fair process, give warnings, and consider alternatives. For discrimination claims, the employee must show that the employer knew about the disability and that the treatment was 'because of' it – not just that the disability existed.
Similar cases
Janitor dismissed for unauthorised absences caught on CCTV: gross misconduct upheld
A janitor with six years' service was fairly dismissed after CCTV and fob data showed he spent extended periods away from his post. The tribunal rejected his unfair dismissal claim.
Redundancy selection: lowest score in pool led to fair dismissal
A Holistic Assessor with 4 years' service was fairly dismissed after scoring lowest in a redundancy selection matrix. The tribunal found the process was reasonable despite the employee's concerns about the criteria.
Catering manager with 16 years' service dismissed for alleged theft and bullying: employer's decision upheld
A tribunal has upheld the dismissal of a catering manager who was found guilty of gross misconduct for stealing tea bags and bullying a colleague, ruling that Serco Ltd's investigation and decision were within the range of reasonable responses.
Research assistant's redundancy claim fails: funding cessation was genuine reason
A research assistant with 12 years' service lost her claim for unfair dismissal, whistleblowing detriment and disability discrimination after the tribunal found her redundancy was genuinely due to loss of funding.