Head chef and manager awarded £7,861 after constructive dismissal and unpaid holiday pay
A head chef and manager who was effectively dismissed after being asked to drop off keys, and who never received a written contract, has been awarded £7,861.30 for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and unauthorised deductions from wages.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- C1 worked as a chef and manager for the respondent's director from March 2017 until March 2021.
- The claimants never received written contracts or written particulars of employment.
- The respondent stopped communicating with C1 in March 2021 and sent a WhatsApp message asking him to drop off keys.
- C1 was found to be an employee, while C2 and C3 were found to be workers.
- The respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages for holiday pay and payslip discrepancies.
- C1 was awarded a total of £7,861.30 for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, holiday pay, payslip discrepancies, and failure to provide written particulars.
Timeline
-
Offer letter
C1 received a letter offering the role of Head Chef at Chromos, with a start date in March 2017.
-
Started work
C1 started working as a chef at Chromos, later joined by his wife and daughter.
-
Transferred to respondent
The claimants started receiving payments from Affinity18 Ltd, the respondent.
-
Furlough
The claimants were placed on furlough due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
-
Furlough discussion
There was a conversation about coming off furlough, but the respondent soon stopped communicating.
-
Last day of work
The claimants last worked for the respondent on this date.
-
WhatsApp message
C1 received a WhatsApp message from the respondent asking him to drop off the keys.
-
Hearing
The employment tribunal hearing took place at London South.
-
Judgment
The reserved judgment was issued, finding unfair dismissal for C1 and awarding various sums.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the head chef was an employee or a worker, whether he was constructively dismissed, and whether the respondent made unauthorised deductions from wages for holiday pay and payslip discrepancies.
The outcome
The tribunal found that the head chef was an employee and was constructively dismissed. The respondent's failure to communicate and request for keys amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract. The head chef was awarded:
- Unfair dismissal (basic award): £1,129.86
- Wrongful dismissal (notice pay): £753.24
- Holiday pay: £3,564.22
- Payslip discrepancies: £907.50
- Failure to provide written particulars: £1,506.48
Total: £7,861.30
The other two claimants (the head chef's wife and daughter) were found to be workers, not employees, and were awarded holiday pay and payslip discrepancies but not unfair dismissal.
Lessons & takeaways
- Even if you work under a zero-hours arrangement, you may still be an employee if there is sufficient mutuality of obligation and control.
- Employers must provide written particulars of employment within two months of starting work; failure to do so can result in a penalty of up to four weeks' pay.
- If an employer stops communicating and asks for company property back, this can be treated as a constructive dismissal if it amounts to a fundamental breach of contract.
- Unauthorised deductions from wages, including for holiday pay and payslip errors, can be claimed up to two years from the date of the deduction.
- Keep records of your hours and pay; the tribunal may rely on your evidence if the employer fails to provide accurate records.
What this case shows in practice
This case highlights the risks for employers who treat long-serving staff as casual workers without proper contracts. The head chef worked for the respondent's director for four years, managing a restaurant and later a bowling alley, yet never received a written contract. When the pandemic hit and furlough ended, communication from the employer dried up. A WhatsApp message asking for the keys back was the final straw, leading the chef to claim constructive dismissal.
The tribunal found that the chef was an employee, not a worker, because of the degree of control and the ongoing relationship. This distinction mattered: employees have stronger rights, including the right not to be unfairly dismissed. The other two claimants, who had less responsibility and more irregular hours, were classified as workers and could not claim unfair dismissal.
What the losing side could have done differently
The respondent, a director who represented himself, made several errors. First, failing to provide written particulars of employment is a straightforward breach that carries a penalty. Second, treating the chef as a zero-hours worker when he effectively managed the business was a mischaracterisation that unravelled at tribunal. Third, the director's decision to stop communicating and send a terse WhatsApp message was seen as a clear repudiatory breach — the chef was entitled to resign and claim constructive dismissal.
Had the respondent provided a contract, kept proper records of hours and holiday pay, and communicated properly about the end of the relationship, the outcome could have been very different. The total award of £7,861.30 could have been avoided with basic employment practices.
Why the result matters for similar claims
For employees in similar situations — especially those in hospitality or other sectors where zero-hours contracts are common — this case is a reminder that your actual working arrangements matter more than the label your employer uses. If you have regular hours, control over your work, and an ongoing relationship, you may be an employee with full unfair dismissal rights.
The case also shows that constructive dismissal claims can succeed even without a formal resignation letter, as long as the employer's conduct clearly shows they no longer intend to be bound by the contract. And for those who have never received a written contract, the tribunal can award up to four weeks' pay as a penalty.
Similar cases
Dismissed for asking about unpaid wages: an automatically unfair dismissal
An autobody technician was unfairly dismissed after requesting outstanding wages and payslips. The tribunal awarded £2,913.82 for unauthorised deductions and other breaches.
Unfair dismissal but 100% Polkey reduction due to workplace closure
A former employee was unfairly dismissed but received only limited compensation because the tribunal found he would have been fairly dismissed a month later when the workplace closed. Total award: £12,419.29.
Redundancy dismissal leads to £17,570 award for multiple employment rights breaches
A former employee of Duchy Farm Kennels Ltd was awarded £17,570.97 after being unfairly dismissed by redundancy, with the tribunal also finding unauthorised wage deductions, unpaid holiday pay, and failure to provide written particulars.
Dismissed after 12 weeks: redundancy, unpaid wages and holiday pay
A former employee was awarded over £10,700 after James Andrew Prams & Nurseries Ltd failed to pay redundancy, wages, notice pay and holiday pay following a redundancy dismissal.
