Demotion that triggered visa salary breach: dismissal for some other substantial reason upheld
A care coordinator lost her right to work after a demotion cut her salary below the sponsorship threshold. The tribunal held that the employer's decision to dismiss was fair.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #sponsorship-licence
- #demotion
- #inadequate-investigation
- #disciplinary-procedure
- #right-to-work
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a care coordinator from 11 June 2011 to 2 February 2018.
- The claimant was demoted following a disciplinary hearing for inaccurate data keeping.
- The demotion reduced her salary below the earnings threshold required by her Tier 2 sponsorship visa.
- The respondent contacted the Home Office and was told that continuing to employ the claimant would expose it to fines or prosecution.
- The claimant's appeal against demotion was rejected as out of time.
- The respondent terminated the claimant's employment because she no longer had the right to work in the UK.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began working for the respondent as a care coordinator.
-
Claimant absent after accident
Claimant was absent from work for several weeks following an accident.
-
Disciplinary hearing
A disciplinary hearing was held chaired by Mr Gillett. The claimant was demoted for gross misconduct due to inaccurate data keeping.
-
Demotion confirmed
The claimant was formally demoted to assistant/support coordinator with reduced salary.
-
Appeal submitted
The claimant sent a letter of appeal against the demotion.
-
Appeal rejected
Ms Grech rejected the appeal as out of time and without additional information.
-
Employment terminated
Ms Grech terminated the claimant's employment because she no longer met the sponsorship requirements.
-
Amendment application refused
Employment Judge Harrington refused the claimant's application to amend her claim to add discrimination claims.
-
Final hearing (part 1)
Substantive hearing for unfair dismissal claim began, held over 6-8 September and 22 September 2021.
-
Judgment on unfair dismissal
Employment Judge Martin dismissed the unfair dismissal claim, finding the dismissal fair for some other substantial reason.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed when her employment was terminated because she no longer had the right to work in the UK, following a demotion that reduced her salary below the earnings threshold required by her Tier 2 sponsorship visa.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim, finding that the dismissal was fair for 'some other substantial reason'.
The key reason was that the claimant's demotion (for gross misconduct) reduced her salary below the minimum required for her Tier 2 sponsorship visa. The employer contacted the Home Office, which indicated that continuing to employ the claimant would expose the company to fines or prosecution. The employer then terminated her employment because she no longer had the right to work in the UK.
The tribunal noted that the employer had a reasonable belief that the claimant could not lawfully remain employed, and that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. No compensation was awarded.
Lessons & takeaways
- If your job is tied to a visa with a minimum salary, a demotion or pay cut could put your right to work at risk.
- Employers must act on reliable information about an employee's right to work, but they should also consider whether the employee can challenge the underlying reason for the salary change.
- A dismissal based on loss of right to work can be fair as 'some other substantial reason' if the employer has taken reasonable steps to verify the position.
- Challenging a demotion or disciplinary outcome promptly may be critical, as delays can limit your options to preserve your visa status.
When a demotion costs you the right to work
This case shows how a disciplinary decision can have unintended consequences for an employee's immigration status. The claimant, a care coordinator with six years' service, was demoted after a disciplinary hearing found she had kept inaccurate data. The demotion reduced her salary below the minimum earnings threshold required by her Tier 2 sponsorship visa. The employer contacted the Home Office and was told that continuing to employ her could lead to fines or prosecution. The employer then dismissed her because she no longer had the right to work in the UK.
What the employer could have done differently
The tribunal accepted that the employer acted on the Home Office's advice, but the case highlights the importance of considering whether the employee could resolve the visa issue. The claimant had appealed the demotion, but her appeal was rejected as out of time. If the employer had waited for the outcome of that appeal, or explored whether the claimant could find another way to meet the visa requirements, the dismissal might have been avoided. However, the tribunal found that the employer's decision to dismiss was within the range of reasonable responses, given the clear legal risk.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that a dismissal based on loss of the right to work can be fair, even if the employee disputes the underlying reason for the salary change. For employees on work visas, any change in salary or job role could affect their immigration status. It is important to raise any concerns about a demotion or pay cut as early as possible, and to seek legal advice if the change could put your right to work at risk. Employers, for their part, should ensure they have up-to-date and accurate information about an employee's right to work before making a dismissal decision, and consider whether there are alternative solutions.
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.
Constructive dismissal claim fails despite breach of trust: 5-month delay in resigning was fatal
An insurance broker who resigned 5 months after a flawed disciplinary hearing lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim because the tribunal found she did not resign in response to the breach of trust and confidence.
Restaurant manager's constructive dismissal and race discrimination claim rejected
A restaurant general manager who resigned after a disciplinary process and alleged race discrimination has lost his claims of constructive dismissal and race discrimination at the Leeds Employment Tribunal.
Security officer's constructive dismissal claim fails: minor pay errors and disciplinary process not a breach of trust
A security officer who resigned after a disciplinary process was started following a two-hour absence from her post has lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal found the employer's conduct, including minor pay issues and a request for an occupational health assessment, did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract.
