Personal banker's constructive dismissal claim fails after three-day stint at new branch
An employment tribunal has dismissed a personal banker's claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination against Santander UK Plc, finding that the final straw she relied on was innocuous and that earlier alleged breaches were not linked to her resignation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Personal Banker from 11 February 2008 until she resigned on 12 June 2016.
- The respondent accepted that the claimant was disabled from February 2016 due to stress, anxiety and depression.
- The claimant resigned after three days at a new branch, citing a failure to provide a fixed office and threat of dismissal procedures as the final straw.
- The tribunal found that the alleged final straw was innocuous and did not contribute to any earlier breach of contract.
- All discrimination claims were dismissed as out of time or failing on the merits.
- The breach of contract claim for notice pay was dismissed as the claimant voluntarily shortened her notice period.
Timeline
-
Employment commenced
Claimant started work as a sales consultant with Santander (formerly Abbey).
-
First grievance raised
Claimant raised a grievance regarding a till difference incident and alleged bullying by manager Sarah Caffull.
-
Grievance appeal outcome
Grievance appeal partially upheld; recommendations included a written apology and a branch move.
-
House fire
Claimant suffered a house fire in mid-March 2015; initial leave request was refused but later granted after union involvement.
-
Signed off sick
Claimant was signed off work with 'Workplace stress' and remained absent for about 10 months.
-
Return to work
Claimant returned to work on a phased return basis at Merry Hill branch under manager Harry Saggu.
-
Wellbeing meeting
Meeting with Claire Butler; claimant agreed to a further phased return and a move to Kingswinford branch.
-
Started at Kingswinford
Claimant began work at Kingswinford branch but resigned after only three working days.
-
Resignation letter
Claimant resigned, initially giving notice until 29 June, later shortened to 12 June.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's employment ended; she later claimed constructive dismissal and discrimination.
-
Claim presented
Claimant presented her claim to the Employment Tribunal.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was constructively unfairly dismissed, whether she suffered disability discrimination (harassment and failure to make reasonable adjustments), and whether she was owed notice pay.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims, including constructive unfair dismissal, disability discrimination (harassment and failure to make reasonable adjustments), and breach of contract for notice pay.
The key reasons were:
- The alleged final straw (failure to provide a fixed office and threat of dismissal procedures) was found to be innocuous and did not contribute to any earlier breach of contract.
- All discrimination claims were dismissed as out of time or failing on the merits.
- The breach of contract claim for notice pay was dismissed because the claimant voluntarily shortened her notice period.
Lessons & takeaways
- A constructive dismissal claim requires a final straw that is more than innocuous – it must contribute to an earlier breach of contract.
- Disability discrimination claims must be brought within three months of the act complained of, or they will be out of time.
- Voluntarily shortening your notice period can undermine a claim for notice pay.
- Long-serving employees are not automatically protected if the final straw is trivial and unrelated to previous grievances.
This case shows the difficulty of proving constructive dismissal when the final straw is perceived as minor. The personal banker, with eight years' service, resigned after just three days at a new branch, citing a failure to provide a fixed office and a threat of dismissal procedures. However, the tribunal found that these events were innocuous and did not form part of a pattern of breach of contract.
What the bank could have done differently
Santander had already made reasonable adjustments for the claimant's disability, including a phased return and branch move. The tribunal noted that the alleged final straw was not linked to any earlier breach. The bank's consistent approach to managing the claimant's return likely helped its defence.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case reinforces that constructive dismissal requires a clear, cumulative breach of contract, not just a minor incident. It also highlights the importance of bringing discrimination claims promptly, as the tribunal dismissed all such claims as out of time. For employees considering resignation, the final straw must be substantial and connected to previous breaches.
Similar cases
Dental nurse's constructive dismissal and discrimination claims rejected by tribunal
A dental nurse who resigned after securing another job failed to prove she was constructively dismissed or that her employer discriminated against her. All claims were dismissed.
Shift team leader loses constructive dismissal claim after credibility issues
A shift team leader with 9 years' service resigned after being placed on a performance improvement plan, but the tribunal dismissed all claims, finding no breach of contract and serious credibility problems with his evidence.
Plumber with back injury forced to resign after employer ignored adjustments
A plumber with six years' service was awarded £134,411 after his employer failed to implement occupational health recommendations, cut his sick pay, and ignored his grievance. The tribunal found constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
27-year social worker dismissed after 9 months' sick leave: tribunal upholds council's decision
Birmingham City Council fairly dismissed a Senior Practitioner with 27 years' service after a 9-month sickness absence for bereavement stress. The tribunal rejected claims of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.