Constructive dismissal after delays in return-to-work plan: a long-serving manager wins unfair dismissal claim
A centre manager with 17 years' service resigned after her employer delayed responding to her return-to-work plan and failed to follow occupational health advice. The tribunal found constructive unfair dismissal.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #long-term-sickness
- #occupational-health
- #failure-to-follow-policy
- #delay-in-return-to-work
- #grievance-handling
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as Centre Manager from 7 January 2002 until she resigned on 28 June 2019.
- She was absent due to Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension (SIH) from 23 April 2018.
- The respondent moved to the formal absence stage without first obtaining a neurologist report as recommended by occupational health.
- There was a significant delay (25 April to 23 May 2019) in responding to the claimant's return-to-work plan.
- The respondent provided a grievance response on 26 June 2019 asserting no breach of contract before meeting with the claimant.
- The claimant resigned on 28 June 2019 claiming constructive dismissal.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as Centre Manager at Everdon Outdoor Learning Centre.
-
Sickness absence began
Claimant started sick leave due to SIH, a rare neurological condition.
-
Occupational health report
OH recommended writing to the neurologist to understand the condition and potential for return.
-
Decision to proceed to formal stage
Respondent decided to move to formal absence procedure without following OH advice to contact neurologist.
-
Stage 1 formal meeting
Claimant was warned that dismissal could follow if attendance did not improve.
-
Neurologist appointment
Claimant saw neurologist; he said she was making good progress but no detailed report was obtained.
-
Return-to-work plan submitted
Claimant proposed a phased return starting 3 June 2019.
-
Claimant chased response
After nearly a month, claimant chased the respondent for a response to her plan.
-
Grievance raised
Claimant sent a letter alleging serious breach of contract due to delays.
-
Respondent's grievance response
Respondent denied breach of contract and invited claimant to a meeting on 3 July.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned with immediate effect, citing repudiatory breach of contract.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's management of the claimant's long-term sickness absence and its handling of her grievance amounted to a fundamental breach of contract, entitling her to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the claimant's claim of constructive unfair dismissal, finding that West Northamptonshire Council breached the implied term of trust and confidence. Key failings included:
- Moving to the formal absence stage without first obtaining a neurologist report as recommended by occupational health.
- A significant delay of nearly a month in responding to the claimant's proposed return-to-work plan.
- Providing a grievance response that denied any breach of contract before meeting with the claimant.
Compensation will be determined at a further hearing. The claimant also succeeded in claims for wrongful dismissal (£7,664.52) and unpaid holiday pay (£1,245.92).
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should follow occupational health advice to obtain specialist medical reports before making decisions on long-term sickness absence.
- Delays in responding to an employee's return-to-work plan can be a sign of unreasonable conduct, especially when the employee has long service.
- Raising a grievance does not automatically affirm the contract if the employer's conduct continues to breach trust and confidence.
- Providing a grievance outcome before holding a meeting undermines the process and may contribute to a finding of constructive dismissal.
A long-serving manager pushed to resign
This case shows how a breakdown in communication and process during long-term sickness absence can lead to a successful constructive dismissal claim. The claimant, a centre manager with 17 years' service, was off work with a rare neurological condition. Despite occupational health recommending that the employer contact her neurologist for a clearer picture, the council pressed ahead with formal absence proceedings without doing so. When the claimant later submitted a phased return-to-work plan, the council took nearly a month to respond, leaving her in limbo.
What the employer could have done differently
The council's failures were not just procedural but went to the heart of the employment relationship. By ignoring occupational health advice and delaying the return-to-work process, it acted in a way that was likely to destroy trust and confidence. A simple step—obtaining the neurologist report and responding promptly to the return-to-work plan—could have avoided the breakdown. The tribunal also noted that the council's grievance response, which denied any breach before meeting with the claimant, added to the sense of unfairness.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that constructive dismissal claims can succeed even when the employer has followed a formal absence policy, if the overall conduct is unreasonable. Long-serving employees are entitled to expect a higher level of care and communication. For anyone considering a similar claim, the key is to show that the employer's actions—taken together—fundamentally damaged the relationship, and that you resigned in response, not after affirming the contract.
Similar cases
Long-term sickness dismissal: employer's flawed process saved by fair appeal
A station support assistant lost his unfair dismissal claim after 20 months off work. The tribunal found the initial decision to dismiss was premature, but the appeal corrected the flaw.
Meter reader with 16 years' service unfairly dismissed for ill health capability
A meter reader who was dismissed while on long-term sick leave after a motorbike accident has won his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claim. The tribunal found that Morrison Data Services Ltd failed to obtain an up-to-date occupational health report before deciding to dismiss.
Security officer dismissed after back injury: tribunal finds unfair dismissal and disability discrimination
A security officer with six years' service was unfairly dismissed after a back injury. The tribunal also found that CIS Security Ltd failed to make reasonable adjustments and discriminated against him arising from his disability.
Dismissed after 10-month absence: employer's reasonable adjustments were enough
An employment tribunal has upheld the dismissal of an assistant branch manager with 28 years' service who was absent for 10 months with anxiety. The employer had offered multiple adjustments but the claimant insisted on a customer ban.