Email about role change treated as resignation: a case of unfair dismissal
A trainee route setter who emailed about changing her role was unfairly dismissed when her employer treated it as a resignation. The tribunal awarded £5,597, including an 18% uplift for failing to follow the ACAS Code.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #ambiguous-resignation
- #acas-code-uplift
- #change-of-role
- #email-correspondence
- #failure-to-follow-procedure
Key facts
- The claimant was employed from 19 March 2019 as a trainee route setter.
- On 14 June 2021 she met with the managing director to discuss a pay rise and was told there were budgetary constraints.
- She emailed on 20 June 2021 stating she had finished her apprenticeship and wanted to change her role, not resign.
- The respondent treated her email as a resignation and issued a P45 on 8 August 2021.
- The tribunal found she did not resign and was unfairly dismissed.
- The respondent failed to follow the ACAS Code of Practice, leading to an 18% uplift.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a trainee route setter.
-
Meeting about pay rise
Claimant met with managing director Patrick Hammond to discuss a pay rise; he said no raises for 6 months due to budget.
-
Claimant's email about role change
Claimant emailed stating she had finished her apprenticeship and wanted to change her role, not resign.
-
Claimant clarified no resignation
Claimant emailed again clarifying she did not intend to resign.
-
Claimant signed off sick
Claimant was signed off with shingles until 29 July 2021.
-
Meeting to discuss new role
Claimant met with managers to discuss a new role offer; she engaged but felt uncomfortable.
-
Dismissal email
Mr Hammond emailed claimant stating her employment was terminated, treating her earlier email as resignation.
-
Claimant reiterated no resignation
Claimant emailed again stating she had not resigned and sought to accept the new role.
-
Respondent's final email
Mr Hammond threatened legal action if claimant continued to insist she had not resigned.
-
Liability hearing
Tribunal heard the case and found claimant was unfairly dismissed.
-
Remedy hearing
Tribunal awarded compensation of £5,597 including an 18% ACAS uplift.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant resigned or was dismissed, and if dismissed, whether the dismissal was unfair. The key issue was whether the employer reasonably interpreted the claimant's email as a resignation.
The outcome
The tribunal decided the claimant was unfairly dismissed. She had not resigned; her emails clearly stated she wanted a change of role, not to end her employment. The respondent failed to follow a fair procedure, including ignoring the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £733
- Compensatory award: £4,131
- ACAS Code uplift (18%): applied to compensatory award
- Total: £5,597
Lessons & takeaways
- If an employee's words or actions are ambiguous, always seek clarification before treating them as a resignation.
- Following the ACAS Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures is essential – failure to do so can lead to an uplift of up to 25% on compensation.
- Keep a clear record of all communications about role changes or resignations to avoid misunderstandings.
- Even if an employee is off sick, you must still follow a fair process before dismissing them.
A misunderstanding that cost £5,597
This case shows how easily a workplace misunderstanding can lead to an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant, a trainee route setter with two years' service, emailed her managing director after a pay rise meeting to say she wanted to change her role – not resign. Despite her clear words, the employer treated her email as a resignation and issued a P45. Even after she repeatedly clarified her position, the employer insisted she had resigned and threatened legal action if she continued to dispute it.
The tribunal found that the claimant did not resign. Her emails were unambiguous: she wanted a different role, not to leave. By treating her email as a resignation without proper investigation or following a fair procedure, the employer dismissed her unfairly. The failure to follow the ACAS Code of Practice led to an 18% uplift on the compensatory award.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have avoided this claim by simply clarifying the claimant's intentions. A quick phone call or meeting would have resolved the ambiguity. Instead, they escalated the situation by issuing a P45 and threatening legal action. Employers should remember that when an employee's words are clear – as they were here – treating them as a resignation without further enquiry is risky.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that employees do not lose their right to a fair process just because they have short service. The ACAS Code applies to all dismissals, and tribunals will penalise employers who ignore it. For employees, it shows that if you clearly state you are not resigning, your employer cannot simply ignore that and treat you as having resigned. Keeping written records of your communications is crucial.
Similar cases
Nursery worker dismissed over fabricated alcohol allegation: no investigation, no appeal
A senior nursery practitioner was unfairly dismissed after her employer fabricated an allegation that she was under the influence of alcohol at work. The Watford tribunal awarded £5,325.75, including a 25% Acas uplift for ignoring the code of practice.
Constructive dismissal after eight-month wait for grievance outcome
An NHS employee resigned after waiting nearly eight months for her grievance outcome. The tribunal found she was constructively unfairly dismissed and awarded £3,756.60.
Dismissed without a disciplinary hearing: procedural unfairness costs employer £9,500
A former employee with two years' service was unfairly dismissed after being suspended and then sacked without any disciplinary hearing. The Cambridge tribunal awarded £9,546.81 in compensation.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.