Senior healthcare assistant dismissed after breakdown in working relationship: unfair dismissal but 75% Polkey reduction
A senior healthcare assistant was unfairly dismissed after a breakdown in working relationships, but the tribunal applied a 75% Polkey reduction, awarding £6,975.14 in compensation.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a senior healthcare assistant from 1 May 2017 until dismissal on 19 July 2019.
- The claimant had a heart attack on 21 May 2014 and was found to be disabled by reason of cardiac infarction.
- The claimant made a protected disclosure about uncalibrated ABPM machines on 24 October 2018 and 5 November 2018.
- The claimant was medically suspended from 20 December 2018 to 30 January 2019 due to his heart condition.
- The respondent dismissed the claimant for breakdown in working relationship after he failed to attend a workplace relationship meeting.
- The tribunal found the dismissal unfair due to procedural flaws but applied a 75% Polkey reduction.
Timeline
-
Heart attack
The claimant suffered a cardiac infarction (heart attack).
-
Started employment
The claimant commenced employment with the respondent as a healthcare assistant.
-
Promoted to senior healthcare assistant
The claimant was promoted to senior healthcare assistant.
-
Flu jab protocol discussion
The claimant raised concerns about the flu jab protocol with Dr Uddin.
-
Meeting with Emma Stanford
The claimant raised concerns about uncalibrated ABPM machines, ear irrigation bookings, and chronic patient care in a lengthy meeting.
-
Written grievance
The claimant submitted a written grievance detailing his concerns.
-
Mediation meeting
A mediation meeting was held but failed due to hostility between the claimant and Jamil Ahmed.
-
Grievance meeting and medical suspension
At the grievance meeting, the claimant became stressed and was sent home; he was placed on medical suspension.
-
Occupational health assessment
Dr Easmon assessed the claimant and reported his heart condition was not an issue, recommending a workplace stressor meeting.
-
Respondent received OH report
The respondent received Dr Easmon's report but continued the suspension due to workplace relationship issues.
-
Grievance outcome and workplace relationship invitation
The claimant received the grievance outcome (rejected) and an invitation to a workplace relationship meeting.
-
Grievance appeal meeting
Dr Ali chaired the appeal meeting; the claimant felt intimidated.
-
Workplace stressor meeting
The long-delayed workplace stressor meeting finally took place.
-
Workplace relationship meeting in absence
The meeting proceeded without the claimant, concluding that he should be dismissed.
-
Dismissal
The claimant was dismissed for breakdown in working relationship.
-
Liability judgment
The tribunal found unfair dismissal but applied 75% Polkey reduction; other claims dismissed.
-
Remedy judgment
The tribunal awarded £6,975.14 in compensation.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was unfairly dismissed for 'some other substantial reason' (breakdown in working relationship) and whether the employer acted reasonably in all the circumstances.
The outcome
The tribunal upheld the unfair dismissal claim but applied a 75% Polkey reduction, meaning the employee was only entitled to 25% of the compensatory award. Other claims – including detriment for protected disclosures, automatic unfair dismissal for whistleblowing, and disability discrimination – were dismissed.
Compensation breakdown:
- Basic award: £1,575.00
- Compensatory award (after 75% Polkey reduction): £5,400.14
- Total: £6,975.14
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers should follow a fair procedure before dismissing for a breakdown in working relationships, including giving the employee a chance to respond.
- A Polkey reduction can significantly reduce compensation if the tribunal finds the employee would likely have been dismissed anyway with proper process.
- Making protected disclosures does not automatically protect an employee from dismissal if the real reason is a breakdown in working relationships.
- Medical suspension should not be prolonged unnecessarily, especially when occupational health has cleared the employee to return.
This case shows how a breakdown in working relationships can lead to dismissal, but also how procedural failures can make that dismissal unfair. The senior healthcare assistant had raised concerns about uncalibrated ABPM machines and other issues, which were treated as protected disclosures. However, the tribunal found that the real reason for dismissal was the breakdown in relationships, not the disclosures.
What went wrong
The employer's process was flawed: the workplace relationship meeting was held in the employee's absence, and there were delays in arranging a stressor meeting recommended by occupational health. The tribunal noted that a fair procedure would have given the employee a chance to explain his side. However, it also found that even with a fair process, there was a 75% chance the employee would have been dismissed anyway due to the irretrievable breakdown.
What the employer could have done differently
The employer could have arranged the stressor meeting sooner, allowed the employee to attend the relationship meeting, and considered alternatives to dismissal. The prolonged medical suspension – which continued even after occupational health cleared the employee – also contributed to the breakdown.
Why this matters
This case illustrates that even when an employer has a valid reason for dismissal, procedural fairness is crucial. The Polkey reduction here was substantial because the tribunal believed the outcome would likely have been the same. For employees, it shows that making protected disclosures does not guarantee protection if relationships have broken down beyond repair. For employers, it is a reminder to follow proper procedures and not to delay necessary meetings.
Similar cases
Paramedic with PTSD unfairly dismissed after redeployment efforts fell short
A HART paramedic with 7 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after developing PTSD from a training incident. The tribunal awarded £26,087 in compensation.
Senior mental health practitioner dismissed on capability grounds wins £199k for disability discrimination and unfair dismissal
A senior mental health practitioner with 13 years' service was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against by an NHS trust. The tribunal awarded £199,149.09, finding the trust failed to make reasonable adjustments and relied on a flawed capability process.
Dismissed without a meeting or appeal: a conduct case with big reductions
A former employee of Fairview Grocers Limited was unfairly dismissed without any meeting or right of appeal, but his own conduct led to a 60% cut in compensation. He was awarded £3,752.89 in total.
Former employee unfairly dismissed but gets only basic award after 70% contributory conduct deduction
A Watford tribunal found Mitie Ltd unfairly dismissed a former employee but reduced his basic award by 70% for his own conduct and made no compensatory award due to a 100% Polkey reduction. He received £1,298.10.