Constructive dismissal claim fails: workload and support issues not a breach of trust
A regional operations manager who resigned twice claiming lack of support and excessive workload lost his constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found no repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #last-straw
- #implied-term
- #trust-and-confidence
- #workload
- #support
Key facts
- The claimant joined the respondent on 3 January 2019 as a regional operations manager.
- A redundancy programme in August 2019 reduced regions from three to two, and the claimant accepted a new role covering a larger area.
- The claimant's company BMW was stolen in October 2020 and replaced with a sub-standard Nissan.
- The claimant made a flexible working request in February 2021 which was refused on business grounds.
- The claimant resigned on 11 May 2021 but rescinded four days later after discussions with his manager.
- The claimant resigned again on 24 June 2021, citing lack of support and excessive workload.
Timeline
-
Claimant started employment
Nathaniel Brooks began work as a regional operations manager for the AA cars division.
-
Redundancy programme
The respondent reduced the number of regions from three to two; the claimant accepted a new role covering a larger area.
-
Burglary and brother's death
The claimant's home was burgled and his company BMW stolen; his brother also died. The respondent provided a sub-standard replacement car.
-
Flexible working request
The claimant requested a four-day week for childcare and caring for his mother; the request was refused on business grounds.
-
Meeting with manager about workload
The claimant met Mr Drown at his home to discuss workload concerns; no formal action plan was produced.
-
Motorbike event
Mr Drown and Mr Creaney attended a performance motorbike event on a non-work day; the claimant was not invited.
-
First resignation
The claimant resigned citing lack of support, but rescinded the resignation on 14 May after speaking with Mr Drown.
-
Management meeting in Buxton
A management meeting was held; the claimant left early and objected to a proposed social motorbike ride.
-
Alleged exclusion from recruitment
The claimant believed Mr Creaney was organising interviews in Reading without informing him; the tribunal found no exclusion.
-
Second resignation
The claimant resigned again, giving three months' notice, citing being stretched too thinly and lack of support.
-
Employment ended
The claimant's employment ended after a period of gardening leave.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's conduct—including increased workload after a redundancy, refusal of a flexible working request, and alleged exclusion from social events—amounted to a repudiatory breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, entitling the employee to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
- The tribunal found that the increased workload and travel after the redundancy were accepted by the claimant and did not breach the contract.
- The refusal of the flexible working request was on genuine business grounds and not a breach.
- The alleged exclusion from social events and lack of support were not sufficiently serious to amount to a breach of trust and confidence.
- The 'last straw' act—Mr Creaney arranging interviews without informing the claimant—was found not to be exclusionary and did not breach the implied term.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of contract by the employer; simply feeling unsupported or overworked is not enough.
- Resigning and then rescinding can weaken a claim, as it suggests the breach was not serious enough to justify leaving.
- Employers can refuse flexible working requests if they have genuine business reasons, provided they follow the proper process.
- Social exclusion at work, without more, is unlikely to amount to a breach of trust and confidence.
A case of resignation, not dismissal
This case illustrates the high bar for constructive dismissal claims. The claimant, a regional operations manager with two years' service, resigned twice in two months, citing excessive workload and lack of support after a redundancy programme expanded his region. He argued that a series of actions by his employer—including refusing a flexible working request, failing to replace team members, and excluding him from social events—amounted to a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, making his resignation a constructive dismissal.
What the tribunal found
The tribunal examined each alleged breach carefully. It found that the increased workload and travel were a consequence of a redundancy process the claimant had accepted, and that the refusal of his flexible working request was based on genuine business needs. The alleged exclusion from motorbike events and a recruitment meeting were not seen as deliberate snubs or acts undermining trust. The 'last straw'—a colleague arranging interviews without telling him—was found to be a misunderstanding, not a breach. Overall, the tribunal concluded that the employer's conduct did not cross the line into repudiatory breach.
Why the claim failed
The claimant had also rescinded his first resignation after discussions with his manager, which the tribunal noted as inconsistent with a claim that trust had been destroyed. The case shows that constructive dismissal claims require clear evidence of a fundamental breach—not just dissatisfaction with workload or management style. Employers who act reasonably, even if imperfectly, are likely to defend such claims successfully.
What this means for similar claims
For employees considering a constructive dismissal claim, this case is a reminder that the burden of proof is on them to show a serious breach. Resigning in the heat of the moment without giving the employer a chance to address concerns can undermine a claim. For employers, it reinforces the importance of documenting decisions and communicating openly, but also shows that not every employee grievance will lead to liability.
Similar cases
Commission scheme change: constructive dismissal claim fails as non-contractual benefit
A Business Development Manager who resigned after his employer changed his commission scheme lost his unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the commission was never contractual and the employer acted reasonably.
PWE sign-off delay: resignation over unauthorised absence meeting was not constructive dismissal
A graduate trainee accountant who resigned after being invited to a disciplinary meeting for unauthorised absence failed to prove constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the employer's conduct did not breach trust and confidence.
Support Manager's constructive dismissal claim over role change fails
A Support Manager who resigned after her role was changed and workload reduced lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence.
Business manager's constructive dismissal claim fails over PIP process
A business manager with 8 years' service resigned after being invited to a second disciplinary hearing for underperformance. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence and dismissed his constructive unfair dismissal claim.