Covid cleaning concerns: constructive unfair dismissal claim fails
A customer service specialist who resigned over Covid cleaning concerns lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found no threat of disciplinary action and no protected disclosure.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a customer service specialist from 7 August 2017.
- She raised concerns about the respondent's COVID-19 cleaning procedures after an outbreak in October 2021.
- The claimant resigned on 7 October 2021, claiming constructive dismissal.
- The tribunal found no threat of disciplinary action was made by the respondent.
- The claimant's claims of unfair dismissal and automatically unfair dismissal were dismissed.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working as a customer service specialist at Right Choice Insurance Brokers Ltd.
-
Return to office
Claimant returned to working from the office after working from home due to the pandemic.
-
COVID-19 outbreak
Manager JC tested positive for COVID-19; another colleague also tested positive.
-
WhatsApp exchange
Claimant asked manager VK about specialist cleaning; VK replied she was off sick and unaware.
-
Phone call with HR
Mr Joseph called claimant; discussion about returning to office; claimant perceived a threat of discipline.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned by email, citing constructive dismissal due to alleged threat and cleaning concerns.
-
Effective date of termination
Claimant's employment ended after notice period.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's conduct amounted to a constructive dismissal and whether the claimant's resignation was triggered by a protected disclosure or health and safety concerns.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the claimant resigned voluntarily and that the employer had not committed a fundamental breach of contract. The alleged threat of disciplinary action was not made, and the cleaning concerns were not raised as a protected disclosure. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- Raising health and safety concerns does not automatically count as a protected disclosure; you must show you reasonably believed the disclosure was in the public interest.
- Constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of contract by the employer; a perceived threat or disagreement over working arrangements may not be enough.
- Resigning in the heat of the moment without giving the employer a chance to address concerns can weaken a constructive dismissal claim.
- Keep a clear record of any concerns you raise and the employer's response; WhatsApp messages may not be sufficient to establish a protected disclosure.
What this case shows
A customer service specialist with four years' service resigned after a Covid outbreak in her office, claiming she was forced out because she raised safety concerns. The tribunal, however, found that she had not been threatened with discipline and that her concerns about cleaning procedures were not raised as a protected disclosure. The case illustrates the high bar for constructive dismissal claims, especially where the employee resigns quickly without giving the employer a chance to respond.
What the employer did right
Right Choice Insurance Brokers Ltd had a track record of accommodating the claimant's health needs and flexible working requests. When she raised concerns about Covid cleaning, the employer responded by explaining that staff had tested negative and that cleaning had been done. The tribunal noted that no disciplinary threat was made and that the claimant's perception of a threat was not reasonable.
Why the result matters
This case is a reminder that not every disagreement about workplace safety will amount to a constructive dismissal or a protected disclosure. Employees who resign in response to a perceived threat or safety concern should ensure they have clearly raised the issue as a disclosure in the public interest and given the employer a fair chance to address it. The tribunal's decision also highlights that employers who have been flexible and supportive in the past may be better placed to defend against such claims.
Similar cases
Before and after school club leader loses Covid-19 safety dismissal claim
A before and after school club leader who refused to attend work during the pandemic claiming serious and imminent danger has lost her unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found her belief was not reasonable given the school's risk assessments.
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.
Nurse who raised PPE concerns during pandemic wins whistleblowing detriment claim
A district nursing team leader who raised concerns about inadequate PPE and risk assessments during the COVID-19 pandemic has won her claim for detriment against Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board. The tribunal found she was isolated from her team and her role was changed after making protected disclosures.
Manufacturing operative loses constructive dismissal claim over Covid safety concerns
An 18-year employee who walked out after being asked to work on a different line and later resigned has lost his unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found his evidence dishonest and that the employer had acted reasonably.