Demoted pub manager loses unfair dismissal claim after tribunal finds no dismissal
A pub manager who was demoted to bar staff and issued a P45 has lost her unfair dismissal claim because the tribunal found she was not dismissed — her contract continued in the lower role.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #demotion
- #probation-period
- #resignation-request
- #accommodation-tied-to-role
- #p45-issued
Key facts
- The claimant was promoted to manager of a pub in May 2021 with a two-year probation period.
- On 24 January 2022, the area manager told the claimant she had failed probation and was demoted to bar staff, requiring her to leave the pub accommodation.
- The claimant did not agree to the demotion but asked for written confirmation of the change.
- The respondent issued a P45 with a leaving date of 18 February 2022, but the tribunal found no dismissal occurred.
- The claimant's contract continued in the role of bar staff after the demotion.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant started work as bar staff at Hark to Topper Public House.
-
Application for manager role
Claimant completed application form for manager position.
-
Promotion to manager
Claimant appointed as manager of Hark to Topper Public House, subject to a two-year probation period.
-
Email about poor trade
Ms Stuart emailed claimant about disappointing trade figures; claimant disputed the figures.
-
Meeting with area manager
Mr Smith made unannounced visit; discussed drop in takings.
-
Follow-up letter
Mr Smith wrote to claimant stating takings were down and attributing it to her lack of popularity.
-
Phone call: demotion and request to resign
Mr Smith told claimant she had failed probation, was demoted to bar staff, and should resign and leave the pub accommodation.
-
Grievance raised
Claimant emailed grievance to Ms Stuart, stating she had been dismissed.
-
Phone call with Ms Stuart
Ms Stuart told claimant she had not been dismissed but demoted; claimant did not agree.
-
Email about demotion
Claimant emailed Ms Stuart and Mr Smith referring to her 'demotion' and asking for written confirmation.
-
P45 received
Claimant received P45 with leaving date of 18 February 2022.
-
Email exchange about address
Ms Stuart agreed to send letter confirming demotion; claimant provided address.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was dismissed by the respondent on or around 18 February 2022, which was necessary for her claims of unfair dismissal and failure to provide written reasons for dismissal.
The outcome
The tribunal unanimously decided that the claimant was not dismissed. The key reason was that the respondent's actions — telling the claimant she had failed her probation and demoting her to bar staff — did not terminate her contract of employment. The contract continued in the role of bar staff, and the P45 issued with a leaving date of 18 February 2022 was an administrative error. As there was no dismissal, the claims for unfair dismissal and failure to provide written reasons failed.
No compensation was awarded as the claims were unsuccessful.
Lessons & takeaways
- A demotion does not necessarily amount to a dismissal — your contract may continue in a different role.
- Issuing a P45 does not automatically mean you have been dismissed; the tribunal will look at whether the employment relationship actually ended.
- If you are told to resign but do not, and your employer continues to treat you as an employee, you may not have been dismissed.
- The burden of proving a dismissal lies with the employee — you must show that the contract was terminated.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the importance of understanding what legally counts as a dismissal. The former pub manager was told she had failed her two-year probation period and was demoted from manager to bar staff. She was also asked to resign and leave the pub accommodation. However, the tribunal found that her employment contract continued — she remained an employee, just in a lower role. The P45 she received was issued in error and did not bring her employment to an end.
What the losing side could have done differently
The claimant argued that being told to resign and receiving a P45 amounted to dismissal. But the tribunal applied an objective test: how would a reasonable employee understand the situation? The key fact was that the respondent never actually terminated the contract. The claimant continued to be employed as bar staff, and the respondent's actions were consistent with a demotion, not a dismissal. The claimant could have clarified her employment status before bringing a claim.
Why the result matters for similar claims
This case serves as a reminder that not every negative change at work — even a demotion with a loss of accommodation — is a dismissal. Employees who believe they have been dismissed must show that their contract was terminated. A P45 alone is not conclusive. If you are demoted but your employment continues, you may need to resign and claim constructive dismissal if you want to argue unfair dismissal, rather than relying on a direct dismissal that never happened.
Similar cases
Demoted without consultation: constructive dismissal after 20 years' service
A long-serving installations manager was constructively dismissed after being demoted twice without consultation. The tribunal awarded £24,331.
Dog trainer dismissed after joining union: detriment but not automatic unfair dismissal
A tribunal found that a dog trainer was unfairly dismissed after his employer withdrew a zero-hour contract offer when he joined a trade union, but the decision to dismiss was made before he joined.
Registered manager wins constructive dismissal after promised new role never materialised
A registered manager with seven years' service was constructively dismissed after her employer failed to implement a promised Yorkshire Manager role, instead creating a new role that effectively demoted her. The tribunal awarded £14,594.38.
Constructive dismissal after demotion and ignored distress: a breach of trust and confidence
A MASH/Link Officer with seven years' service was constructively dismissed after being removed from management duties and having her distress ignored. The tribunal awarded £39,168, reduced by 25% for her own conduct.