Enablement assistant loses constructive dismissal claim after flexible working request refused
A tribunal has dismissed claims of constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination brought by an enablement assistant with 13 years' service after her employer refused her request for reduced weekend-only hours.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as an Enablement Assistant from 6 January 2009.
- She had significant sickness absence, approximately 20 months between 2020 and 2022.
- She requested a temporary reduction in hours to 4 hours on Saturday and Sunday, as recommended by Occupational Health.
- The respondent refused the request, citing practical difficulties in covering the rota gaps.
- The claimant resigned on 27 June 2022, claiming constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
- The Tribunal found no failure to make reasonable adjustments and no repudiatory breach of contract.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for the respondent as a Home Care Assistant, later becoming an Enablement Assistant.
-
New manager appointed
Yusuf Alam became the claimant's manager.
-
Occupational Health report
Occupational Health recommended a phased return and a reduction in hours to 4 hours each Saturday and Sunday for 3 months.
-
Claimant requested reasonable adjustments
Claimant emailed Yusuf Alam requesting the adjustments recommended by Occupational Health.
-
Respondent refused request
Yusuf Alam emailed the claimant stating the requested adjustments could not be accommodated due to service needs.
-
Meeting to discuss flexible working
Claimant met with Yusuf Alam; she requested a written decision and no further meetings.
-
Written refusal of flexible working
Yusuf Alam sent a letter refusing the claimant's request to work 4 hours a day, 2 days a week on a two-week pattern.
-
Claim presented to Tribunal
Claimant presented a claim for disability discrimination.
-
Claimant resigned
Claimant sent a letter of resignation, effective 8 August 2022, citing the refusal of flexible working and loss of trust.
-
Telephone conversation with manager
Claimant spoke with Yusuf Alam about possible three-hour shifts; no agreement reached.
-
Final telephone conversation
Claimant spoke with Yusuf Alam; he denied saying other employees questioned her hours.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer failed to make reasonable adjustments for the employee's disability (anxiety and depression) by refusing her request to work only four hours on Saturdays and Sundays, and whether that refusal, combined with other conduct, amounted to a fundamental breach of contract entitling her to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed both claims. It held that the employer had not failed to make reasonable adjustments because the requested shift pattern was not a proportionate step – it would have caused significant disruption to the rota and other staff. The employer had considered the occupational health advice but concluded the specific pattern could not be accommodated.
On the constructive dismissal claim, the tribunal found no repudiatory breach of contract. The refusal of the flexible working request was communicated in a reasonable manner, and the employee's loss of trust was not caused by the employer's conduct. The employee resigned before the employer had a chance to explore alternative adjustments.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can refuse a specific reasonable adjustment request if it causes disproportionate disruption, but they should consider alternative adjustments and explain their reasoning clearly.
- Employees who resign before giving the employer a reasonable opportunity to explore alternatives risk losing a constructive dismissal claim.
- Length of service does not automatically make a requested adjustment reasonable if it conflicts with genuine operational needs.
- A single refusal of a flexible working request is unlikely to amount to a fundamental breach of contract unless accompanied by other undermining behaviour.
When a reasonable adjustment request meets operational reality
This case illustrates the limits of an employer's duty to make reasonable adjustments. The employee, an enablement assistant with 13 years' service, had significant sickness absence due to anxiety and depression. Occupational health recommended a phased return of just four hours on Saturdays and Sundays for three months. Her employer refused, citing practical difficulties in covering the rota gaps.
The tribunal accepted that the employee's disability was known, and that the employer had a duty to make reasonable adjustments. However, the duty is not absolute. The tribunal found that the requested pattern – working only at weekends – would have placed an unreasonable burden on other staff and the service. The employer had considered the request properly and offered to discuss alternatives, but the employee did not engage further before resigning.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer's decision was ultimately upheld, but the case highlights the importance of clear communication. The manager's initial refusal by email could have been followed by a more proactive offer of alternative patterns. The employee felt her concerns were not listened to, which contributed to her loss of trust. A more collaborative approach – even if the specific request could not be accommodated – might have avoided the resignation and tribunal claim.
Why this result matters
For employees, this case is a reminder that resigning and claiming constructive dismissal is a high-risk strategy. The tribunal will look at whether the employer's conduct was so serious that it destroyed the trust and confidence necessary for the employment relationship. A single refusal of a flexible working request, even one backed by occupational health, is unlikely to meet that threshold if the employer has reasonable grounds and is willing to discuss alternatives.
For employers, the case confirms that operational needs can justify refusing a specific adjustment, but only if the decision is made after proper consideration and with a genuine attempt to find a workable solution. The duty to make reasonable adjustments is a duty to consider steps that are practicable, not to grant every request.
Similar cases
Inventory operative loses constructive dismissal claim over face mask policy and grievance handling
An inventory operative with five years' service who resigned after a dispute over face masks and a grievance about disability discrimination has lost her constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claims.
Redeployment after disability: constructive dismissal claim fails
A production operator with bipolar disorder resigned claiming constructive dismissal and disability discrimination. The tribunal rejected all claims, finding the employer acted reasonably throughout.
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.
Pharmacy technician's constructive dismissal claim fails after not sharing adjustment passport with new employer
A pharmacy dispensary technician with fibromyalgia and other conditions lost her constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims after the tribunal found she did not share her adjustment passport with her new employer following a TUPE transfer.