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.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- Mr Attoh was employed as an Audit Assistant Manager from 16 July 2018 until his resignation on 23 April 2020.
- He was placed on informal performance improvement plans from May 2019 due to a 'below expectations' rating.
- He raised a grievance in April 2020 and an ethics complaint about a colleague accessing his login credentials.
- He resigned on 23 April 2020, citing mistreatment and the formalisation of his PIP.
- The tribunal found that the respondent had reasonable and proper cause for its actions and that race played no part in the treatment.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Mr Attoh began work as an Audit Assistant Manager at Grant Thornton's Birmingham office.
-
Performance concerns raised
Mr Anton told Mr Attoh his performance was 'at the very bottom of the spectrum' and placed him on an informal PIP.
-
Role title changed
Mr Attoh's job title changed from Executive to Assistant Manager as part of a reorganisation.
-
Meeting with Ms Gladwin
Mr Attoh met with Natalie Gladwin to discuss his concerns about treatment; he did not mention race.
-
Protected disclosure made
Mr Attoh reported that his login credentials had been breached and a client file accessed without authorisation.
-
Protected conversation offered
GT offered a protected conversation about exit terms; Mr Attoh declined.
-
Grievance and ethics complaint
Mr Attoh raised a formal grievance and an ethics complaint about the login breach.
-
Resignation
Mr Attoh resigned with three months' notice, citing mistreatment and the formalisation of his PIP.
-
Formal capability meeting
GT held a formal capability meeting and issued a written warning; Mr Attoh was placed on a formal PIP.
-
Second grievance
Mr Attoh raised a further grievance alleging race discrimination.
-
Grievance outcome
GT dismissed Mr Attoh's grievance after investigation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employee was subjected to race discrimination, harassment, victimisation, or detriment for making protected disclosures, and whether he was constructively unfairly dismissed.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that Grant Thornton had reasonable and proper cause for placing the employee on a performance improvement plan and that the treatment was not related to his race. The employee's resignation did not amount to constructive dismissal because the employer had not repudiated the contract. The protected disclosure about a login breach was not shown to have caused any detriment, and the employee's grievance was properly investigated.
Lessons & takeaways
- A performance improvement plan, even if formalised, is unlikely to amount to a constructive dismissal if the employer has genuine performance concerns and follows a fair process.
- To succeed in a race discrimination claim, there must be evidence that race was a factor in the treatment — a mere belief or feeling is not enough.
- Making a protected disclosure does not give blanket immunity from performance management; the employer must not subject the employee to a detriment because of the disclosure.
- Raising a grievance does not automatically protect an employee from being managed for performance if the grievance is properly investigated and the performance concerns are genuine.
What this case shows in practice
This case illustrates the difficulty of proving constructive dismissal and discrimination when an employer has a documented performance concern. The employee, an Audit Assistant Manager with two years' service, was placed on an informal performance improvement plan after being rated 'below expectations'. He later resigned, claiming that the formalisation of the PIP and other treatment amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, and that he had been discriminated against because of his race.
The tribunal heard evidence over 13 days and concluded that Grant Thornton had acted reasonably. The performance concerns were genuine, and the employer had given the employee opportunities to improve. The formal PIP was only introduced after the employee had resigned, and the tribunal found that the employer's actions were within the range of reasonable responses.
What the losing side could have done differently
From the employee's perspective, the key weakness was the lack of evidence linking his treatment to race. The tribunal noted that he had not mentioned race in his initial grievance and that the colleagues who managed him had also managed other employees with performance issues. To succeed in a discrimination claim, it is essential to have direct or circumstantial evidence that the protected characteristic played a part in the treatment.
For employers, this case is a reminder that proper documentation and a clear rationale for performance management are crucial. Grant Thornton was able to show that its actions were based on objective performance data and that it had followed its own procedures. The protected disclosure about a login breach was investigated, and the tribunal found no evidence that it had led to any detriment.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This decision reinforces that constructive dismissal claims require a fundamental breach of contract by the employer. A performance improvement plan, even if stressful, does not normally amount to such a breach if the employer is acting in good faith. Similarly, race discrimination claims need more than a subjective feeling of unfairness — they require evidence that the employer treated the employee less favourably because of race. The case also highlights that the length of service can affect what is considered a reasonable response; here, the employee's relatively short service meant the employer was not expected to invest heavily in long-term support.
Similar cases
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.
Registered mental health nurse loses race discrimination claims against Cygnet
A registered mental health nurse who alleged race discrimination and harassment by Cygnet NW Limited has had all his claims dismissed by the Sheffield Employment Tribunal.
Constructive dismissal after whistleblowing and disability harassment: a partial win for former employee
A former employee who resigned after being required to attend a disciplinary investigation meeting following protected disclosures has won claims for detriment, disability discrimination, harassment and victimisation, but her constructive unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. She was awarded £12,822.78.
Probationary lecturer dismissed for poor performance: all claims fail
A physiotherapy lecturer who was dismissed during her probationary period for failing a Performance Improvement Plan has lost her claims of unfair dismissal, discrimination, and victimisation against Cardiff University.