Paint shop operative's constructive dismissal claim fails after redundancy selection
A paint shop operative who resigned to secure a redundancy payment lost his unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #indirect-age-discrimination
- #redundancy-selection
- #furlough
- #health-and-safety-representative
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a paint shop operative from 13 July 2015 until he resigned on 15 October 2020.
- The claimant was furloughed in March 2020 and not recalled because he was only competent on the solvent paint line.
- The respondent conducted a redundancy exercise in July 2020, scoring employees on skills, attendance, and behaviour.
- The claimant was provisionally selected for redundancy and offered a trial period in the warehouse.
- The claimant resigned before the end of the trial period to secure a redundancy payment.
- The tribunal found no breach of trust and confidence and no indirect age discrimination.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as a paint shop operative at Omega Plc.
-
Spurr's email
Mr Spurr sent an email describing the claimant as a 'main protagonist' and 'whipping the men up into a frenzy' after a health and safety toolbox talk.
-
Furlough started
Claimant was placed on furlough due to the coronavirus pandemic.
-
Remained on furlough
Claimant was informed by letter that he would remain on furlough.
-
Redundancy announced
Respondent announced a proposed redundancy exercise, with 4 employees at risk in the paint shop.
-
First consultation meeting
Claimant attended individual consultation meeting with Mr Knott and received his redundancy scores.
-
Alternative role enquiry
Claimant emailed HR expressing interest in a warehouse role.
-
Warehouse trial started
Claimant began a trial period in the warehouse with a target pick rate of 400 doors per day.
-
Resignation
Claimant gave notice of resignation effective 23 October 2020, citing desire to secure redundancy payment.
-
Judgment
Employment Tribunal dismissed claims of unfair dismissal and indirect age discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's actions during furlough and redundancy selection amounted to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, and whether the redundancy scoring indirectly discriminated against older workers.
The outcome
The Employment Tribunal dismissed the claims of unfair dismissal (both ordinary and automatic) and indirect age discrimination.
Key reasons:
- The claimant resigned to secure a redundancy payment, not because of any breach by the employer.
- The redundancy scoring system was applied fairly and was not discriminatory.
- The employer had reasonable and proper cause for its actions, including keeping the claimant on furlough and offering a trial period.
No compensation was awarded as the claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Resigning to secure a redundancy payment may not amount to constructive dismissal if the employer has not fundamentally breached the contract.
- Employers can keep employees on furlough based on business needs, provided the process is transparent and non-discriminatory.
- Redundancy selection criteria that rely on recent work experience may disadvantage older workers, but can be justified if they serve a legitimate business aim.
- Claimants should ensure they resign in response to a clear breach of contract, not for other reasons like financial gain.
This case shows the limits of constructive dismissal claims when an employee resigns primarily to access a redundancy payment rather than in response to an employer's breach. The claimant, a paint shop operative with five years' service, was furloughed during the pandemic and later selected for redundancy. He accepted a trial period in the warehouse but resigned before it ended, citing a desire to secure a statutory redundancy payment.
What the tribunal decided
The tribunal found that the employer, Omega Plc, acted reasonably throughout. The redundancy scoring was based on skills, attendance, and behaviour, and the claimant was not singled out. His health and safety role did not influence the decision. The tribunal also rejected the indirect age discrimination claim, noting that the scoring criteria were a proportionate means of selecting the most suitable employees for retention.
What could have been done differently?
The claimant might have succeeded if he had shown that the employer's actions — such as keeping him on furlough or criticising his warehouse performance — were designed to force him out. However, the evidence showed that the employer offered a genuine alternative role and that the claimant's resignation was a strategic choice. Employers should ensure that redundancy processes are transparent and that any trial periods are properly supported, as criticism of performance can be misconstrued.
Why this matters
This case reinforces that constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of contract that causes the resignation. Employees who resign for other reasons, such as to obtain a payment, may find their claims fail. It also confirms that redundancy selection based on recent work experience can be justified even if it disproportionately affects older workers, provided the employer has a legitimate business aim.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal claim fails after employee stayed on for months
A solutions engineer who resigned after a performance improvement plan and grievance process lost his constructive dismissal claim because he stayed in the job too long after the alleged breaches.
TUPE transfer meant employer was not liable for constructive dismissal
Two employees who claimed constructive dismissal and unfair dismissal against Britannia Driving School Ltd had their claims dismissed after the tribunal found a TUPE transfer had already moved their employment to another company.
Furlough refusal during pandemic: HGV driver's constructive dismissal claim fails
An HGV driver with COPD who resigned after his employer refused to furlough him in November 2020 has lost his unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims. The tribunal found the employer correctly interpreted the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme rules.
Car Parking Manager loses constructive dismissal claim over furlough, PIP and grievance handling
A 10-year employee who resigned claiming constructive dismissal after being furloughed, placed on a performance improvement plan and having his grievance rejected has lost his case. The tribunal found no fundamental breach of trust and confidence.