Agency nurse's whistleblowing claim fails after tribunal finds no protected disclosures made
A registered nurse working as a swabber at a COVID-19 testing site claimed she was removed after raising health and safety concerns, but the tribunal found she did not make any protected disclosures and was removed due to a dispute over a break rota.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #agency-worker
- #covid-testing
- #oral-disclosure
- #credibility
- #journal-non-disclosure
- #break-rota-dispute
Key facts
- The claimant was a registered nurse working as a swabber at a COVID-19 testing site at East Midlands Airport.
- The claimant alleged she made six oral protected disclosures about health and safety issues between December 2020 and February 2021.
- The tribunal found the claimant did not make any of the alleged disclosures as a fact.
- The claimant's deployment was ended after a dispute about a new break-recording rota, which the tribunal found was the genuine reason.
- The decision-makers (Mr Spicer and Mr Bennet) had no knowledge of any protected disclosures.
- The claimant had a history of dishonesty, including fraud convictions and being struck off the nursing register.
Timeline
-
First spell of engagement
Claimant worked briefly at EMA testing site via agency PULSE as a swabber until 6 January 2021.
-
Temporary stand-down
Claimant and others were sent home due to too many staff on site; told they could return in about 2 weeks.
-
Joined first respondent agency
Claimant joined Hearts First Ambulance Ltd and was allocated shifts starting 23 January 2021.
-
Return to EMA site
Claimant returned to work at EMA testing site; alleged first disclosure (repeat of December concerns) but tribunal found no disclosure made.
-
Alleged disclosure to H&S team
Claimant claimed she made disclosures to an unidentified H&S officer; tribunal rejected this.
-
Alleged disclosure in clinical team meeting
Claimant alleged she raised four issues; tribunal found she did not make these disclosures.
-
Alleged disclosure to Gurprit and Ms Squires
Claimant said she repeated previous day's concerns; tribunal rejected due to lack of evidence.
-
Alleged disclosure about waste bins
Claimant alleged she raised hazardous waste bin issues; tribunal found no disclosure made.
-
Dispute over break rota
Claimant led staff in challenging new break-recording rota; Ms McKeever decided to request her removal.
-
Deployment ended
Claimant's deployment with second respondent was terminated; she started ACAS Early Conciliation the next day.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the nurse made protected qualifying disclosures about health and safety issues, and if so, whether those disclosures caused her deployment to be ended.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claims against both respondents.
The key reason was that the tribunal did not accept that the nurse made any of the six alleged oral disclosures. The evidence showed that the decision-makers had no knowledge of any disclosures, and the real reason for ending her deployment was a dispute over a new break rota.
No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe you have been subjected to a detriment for whistleblowing, you must be able to prove that you actually made a protected disclosure.
- Oral disclosures can be difficult to prove without contemporaneous records or corroborating witnesses.
- A dispute over working conditions, such as a break rota, is not automatically linked to whistleblowing unless you can show the disclosure was a material cause of the treatment.
- Tribunals will consider your credibility carefully, especially if there is a history of dishonesty.
This case shows the importance of being able to prove that a protected disclosure was actually made. The nurse, a registered agency worker at a COVID-19 testing site, claimed she had raised health and safety concerns orally on six occasions between December 2020 and February 2021. However, the tribunal found that she did not make any of those disclosures as a fact.
What went wrong for the claimant
The tribunal heard that the nurse's deployment ended after she led colleagues in challenging a new break-recording rota. The decision-makers, site manager Laura McKeever and chief nurse David Spicer, had no knowledge of any protected disclosures. The tribunal accepted their evidence that the reason for ending her deployment was the rota dispute, not whistleblowing. The nurse's credibility was also undermined by her history of dishonesty, including fraud convictions and being struck off the nursing register.
What the respondents did right
The respondents were able to show a clear, non-whistleblowing reason for the nurse's removal. They had contemporaneous notes and witness evidence supporting the rota dispute as the trigger. The tribunal also noted that the nurse's claims of oral disclosures were not supported by any written records or corroborated by other witnesses.
Why this matters
For agency workers, the same legal protections apply as for employees, but the burden of proof is on the worker to show that a protected disclosure was made and was a material cause of the detriment. This case is a reminder that tribunals will scrutinise the evidence carefully, especially where disclosures are alleged to have been made orally and there is a lack of supporting documentation.
Similar cases
Agency worker's multiple claims struck out: no jurisdiction and out of time
An agency worker who worked for less than two years had his unfair dismissal, unpaid wages, and breach of contract claims dismissed by the tribunal, along with human exploitation allegations which the tribunal had no power to hear.
Agency mental health worker's whistleblowing claim dismissed: safety concerns not a protected disclosure
An Approved Mental Health Professional who withdrew from work citing serious danger lost his whistleblowing and health and safety detriment claims. The tribunal found his concerns did not amount to a protected disclosure or a reasonable belief of imminent danger.
Production operative dismissed during long-term sick leave: unfair dismissal claim fails on service
A production operative who was dismissed while on sick leave for plantar fasciitis and depression lost her unfair dismissal claim because she had less than two years' service. All disability discrimination claims were also dismissed.
Agency worker's employment status claims dismissed: no contract with end-user
An agency worker who claimed unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and equal pay against the end-user and hirer lost all claims after the tribunal found he was not an employee of either respondent.