Ambulance care assistant loses constructive dismissal claim over training and hours dispute
An ambulance care assistant who resigned claiming constructive dismissal over a training delay and contract variation has lost her case. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #contract-variation
- #training-issue
- #trust-and-confidence
- #zero-hours-contract
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an Ambulance Care Assistant from 20 June 2019 on a zero hours contract.
- The claimant chose option 3 (35 hours guaranteed) on a contract form dated 29 September 2021 but did not sign the formal contract letter.
- The claimant alleged a verbal agreement at her appraisal on 30 November 2021 to work 35 hours per week with one weekend in four, but the tribunal found no such agreement was reached.
- The claimant's BLS certificate required refresher training by 13 March 2022, but the respondent informed her the certificate remained valid.
- The claimant resigned on 15 March 2022, citing the respondent's failure to provide training and contractual breaches.
- The tribunal found no breach of contract or the implied term of trust and confidence, and therefore no constructive dismissal.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as an Ambulance Care Assistant on a zero hours contract.
-
FREC 3 certificate awarded
Claimant awarded QA Level 3 Certificate in First Response Emergency Care, valid for 3 years with annual BLS refresher due 13 March 2021 and 2022.
-
Claimant chose option 3 contract
Claimant signed a form choosing option 3 (35 hours guaranteed, 1 in 2 weekends).
-
Contract letter sent
Respondent sent a letter confirming changes to contract effective 1 December 2021, including 35 hours variable and every other weekend. Claimant did not sign.
-
Appraisal meeting
Claimant had appraisal with Helen Minnis; claimant alleged verbal agreement on hours, but tribunal found no agreement reached.
-
Claimant raised grievance
Claimant wrote formal grievance about being moved to zero hours contract without consultation.
-
Respondent offered 16-hour contract
Respondent wrote to claimant offering 16 hours per week, one weekend in four, Tuesday to Thursday.
-
Claimant resigned
Claimant's solicitors wrote to respondent stating she resigned due to expired training and contractual issues, claiming constructive dismissal.
-
Final hearing
Full merits hearing held at Cambridge Employment Tribunal.
-
Judgment issued
Reserved judgment dismissing the claim for unfair dismissal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed, specifically whether the respondent breached the implied term of trust and confidence by failing to agree to her preferred contract terms and by delaying refresher training.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for unfair dismissal. The claimant was not constructively dismissed.
The key reasons were:
- The tribunal found no verbal agreement on 35 hours per week and one weekend in four at the appraisal meeting.
- The respondent's communication about the BLS certificate was not a breach of contract; the certificate remained valid.
- The claimant resigned before any breach could be established, and the respondent had offered a 16-hour contract as a compromise.
No compensation was awarded as the claim failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe a verbal agreement changes your contract, get it in writing and signed to avoid disputes.
- Resigning without giving your employer a chance to address your concerns may weaken a constructive dismissal claim.
- A delay in training does not automatically amount to a breach of trust and confidence if the employer provides reassurance.
- Tribunals will closely examine the evidence of any alleged agreement; unsupported claims are unlikely to succeed.
A dispute over hours and training
This case shows how difficult it can be to prove constructive dismissal when the evidence does not support the employee's account. The claimant, an ambulance care assistant with three years' service, resigned after a disagreement over her working hours and a delay in refresher training. She claimed the respondent had verbally agreed to a 35-hour week with one weekend in four, but later varied that without consultation. She also said the respondent failed to provide required training, putting her in an unsafe position.
The tribunal, however, found no such verbal agreement was reached at the appraisal meeting. The documentary evidence showed the claimant had chosen a different contract option and had not signed the formal letter. The respondent's communication about the BLS certificate was also not a breach; the certificate remained valid, and the respondent had informed her accordingly.
What the respondent did right
The respondent was able to show that it had acted reasonably throughout. It offered the claimant a 16-hour contract as a compromise, and there was no evidence of a fundamental breach. The tribunal noted that the claimant resigned before the respondent had a chance to address her concerns, which undermined her claim.
What this means for similar claims
For employees considering a constructive dismissal claim, this case highlights the importance of having clear, written evidence of any contractual changes. Verbal agreements are difficult to prove. It also shows that resigning in haste, without giving the employer an opportunity to remedy the situation, can be fatal to a claim. Employers, meanwhile, can take comfort that reasonable communications and offers of alternative contracts can defeat such claims.
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.
Constructive dismissal claim fails after informal complaints not pursued as grievances
An Operational Support Grade at HMP Garth who resigned after alleging bullying and poor complaint handling lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the employer acted reasonably and the complaints were not formal grievances.
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.