Channel Account Director wins constructive dismissal and age discrimination claim after being put on PIP
A tribunal found that a Channel Account Director with two years' service was constructively unfairly dismissed and subjected to age discrimination after his manager planned to dismiss him before he accrued full employment rights.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #age-discrimination
- #performance-improvement-plan
- #grievance-mishandling
- #subject-access-request
- #harassment
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Channel Account Director from 7 January 2019 until his resignation on 2 March 2021.
- On 18 December 2020, the respondent planned to dismiss the claimant before he accrued two years' service, as evidenced by a calendar invite.
- The claimant was subjected to a performance improvement plan without objective evidence of underperformance.
- The respondent's grievance investigation was inadequate and conducted by a manager who was involved in the decision to dismiss.
- The respondent deliberately withheld a document requested under a subject access request.
- The claimant resigned after receiving the grievance outcome, which he considered a final straw.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant started work as Channel Account Director.
-
New line manager
Mr Hesketh became the claimant's line manager.
-
Conversation about Mr Grimes
Mr Hesketh expressed a preference for a younger candidate, saying he wanted to change team dynamics.
-
Meeting to plan dismissal
Mr Hesketh, Mr Bale, and Mr Bartek met to plan the claimant's dismissal before he reached two years' service.
-
Claimant saw calendar invite
The claimant saw the meeting invitation indicating a plan to 'move Mark on'.
-
Return to work meeting
Mr Hesketh gave the claimant a spreadsheet of tasks, but did not explicitly raise performance concerns.
-
Performance improvement plan meeting
Mr Hesketh informed the claimant he was being placed on a formal PIP.
-
Claimant submitted grievance
The claimant raised a grievance about the PIP and alleged age discrimination.
-
Grievance outcome
Mr Bale rejected the grievance; the claimant considered this a final straw.
-
Resignation
The claimant resigned and appealed the grievance outcome.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed, wrongfully dismissed, and subjected to direct age discrimination and harassment related to age.
The outcome
The tribunal found in favour of the claimant on all main claims.
- The claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed because the employer's actions – including planning to dismiss him before he accrued two years' service, imposing a PIP without evidence, and conducting a flawed grievance investigation – breached the implied term of trust and confidence.
- Direct age discrimination was established when the manager expressed a preference for a younger candidate and planned to 'move on' the claimant.
- Harassment related to age was also proved.
Compensation awarded:
- Basic award: £1,614
- Compensatory award: £27,193.05
- Wrongful dismissal: £1,578.52
- Injury to feelings: £20,000
- Interest on injury to feelings: £3,195.45
- Grossing up for tax: £17,860.34
- Total: £71,441.36
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should not impose a performance improvement plan without clear, objective evidence of underperformance.
- Planning to dismiss an employee before they accrue two years' service can be evidence of bad faith and may lead to a finding of constructive dismissal.
- Grievance investigations must be independent and thorough; using a manager involved in the alleged discrimination undermines the process.
- Deliberately withholding documents requested under a subject access request can be used as evidence of a breach of trust and confidence.
- Expressing a preference for younger employees and acting on it can amount to direct age discrimination and harassment.
A case of planning to dismiss before rights accrued
This case highlights how an employer's attempt to dismiss an employee before they reached two years' service backfired. The claimant, a Channel Account Director, had been employed for just under two years when his line manager, Mr Hesketh, held a meeting to plan his dismissal. The calendar invite, which the claimant saw, revealed the plan to 'move Mark on'. This was a critical piece of evidence that the tribunal found undermined the employer's case.
The tribunal also found that the performance improvement plan (PIP) imposed on the claimant was not based on objective evidence. The manager had not raised any performance concerns before the PIP was introduced. This, combined with the fact that the grievance investigation was conducted by a manager who was involved in the decision to dismiss, showed a lack of fair process.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have avoided liability by following a fair capability procedure, based on genuine performance concerns, and by ensuring the grievance was investigated by someone independent. Instead, the tribunal found that the respondent deliberately withheld a document requested under a subject access request, which further damaged trust.
The claimant resigned after receiving the grievance outcome, which he considered the final straw. The tribunal agreed that the employer's conduct amounted to a fundamental breach of contract, entitling him to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that employees with less than two years' service are not automatically unprotected. If the employer's actions amount to a fundamental breach of contract, a constructive dismissal claim can succeed. It also shows that age discrimination claims can succeed where there is evidence of a preference for younger workers, even if the employee is not replaced by someone younger.
The total compensation of over £71,000 reflects the seriousness of the employer's conduct, including £20,000 for injury to feelings. This case underscores the importance of fair treatment and proper process, regardless of an employee's length of service.
Similar cases
Shift team leader loses constructive dismissal claim after credibility issues
A shift team leader with 9 years' service resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan, but the tribunal dismissed all claims, finding no breach of contract and serious credibility problems with his evidence.
Residential support worker loses constructive dismissal claim over Alzheimer's comment
A residential support worker who resigned after a co-worker's Alzheimer's joke was not constructively dismissed, the tribunal has ruled. The claim for harassment related to age also failed.
Audit Assistant Manager loses constructive dismissal and race discrimination claim against Grant Thornton
An Audit Assistant Manager with 2 years' service who resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan has lost his claims of constructive unfair dismissal, race discrimination and whistleblowing detriment. The tribunal found the employer had reasonable cause for its actions.
Constructive dismissal after account reallocation and performance plan: a flawed process
A Services Account Manager with four years' service was constructively and unfairly dismissed after SAP placed her on a performance improvement plan and reallocated her largest accounts without proper process. The tribunal dismissed her discrimination claims.