Newly qualified social worker's discrimination claims against Kent County Council dismissed
A tribunal dismissed all discrimination claims brought by a newly qualified social worker against Kent County Council, finding no evidence of race, age, or sex discrimination or harassment.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #newly-qualified-social-worker
- #asye-programme
- #performance-issues
- #occupational-health-referral
- #reference-dispute
- #unconscious-bias-allegation
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a newly qualified social worker from 2 September 2019 to 24 January 2020.
- The claimant accepted he was underperforming and struggling with his caseload.
- The respondent offered various support measures including supervision, coaching, and a suggestion to move teams.
- The claimant resigned on 17 January 2020, stating personal and family reasons.
- The tribunal found no evidence of discrimination or harassment based on race, age, or sex.
- The claimant's claims were dismissed in their entirety.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant began employment as a newly qualified social worker.
-
ASYE programme started
Claimant started the Assessed and Supported Year in Employment programme.
-
First ASYE review
Action plan provided due to performance concerns.
-
Supervision meeting with Mr Meggitt
Suggestion made for claimant to move to another team for support.
-
Occupational health referral suggested
Manager suggested referral to explore possible ASD.
-
Claimant resigned
Claimant submitted resignation letter citing personal and family reasons.
-
Employment ended
Claimant's last day of employment; paid notice period.
-
Reference provided
Respondent provided a reference noting unsatisfactory performance.
-
Claim presented to tribunal
Claimant presented claims of discrimination and breach of contract.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the Council's actions towards the claimant, including performance management and a referral to occupational health, amounted to direct discrimination or harassment based on race, age, or sex, and whether the reference provided was a breach of contract.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims brought by the newly qualified social worker against Kent County Council.
The key reasons were:
- The claimant accepted he was underperforming and struggling with his caseload.
- The Council offered support including supervision, coaching, and a suggestion to move teams.
- There was no evidence that any treatment was because of race, age, or sex.
- The reference provided was accurate and not a breach of contract.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can manage performance of new starters without fear of discrimination claims, provided they offer support and act reasonably.
- Claimants must provide specific evidence linking treatment to a protected characteristic; general allegations are not enough.
- An accurate reference reflecting genuine performance issues is unlikely to be a breach of contract.
- Withdrawing a claim for constructive unfair dismissal due to lack of service does not strengthen other claims.
This case shows that employers can take performance concerns seriously with new employees without falling foul of discrimination law, as long as they act reasonably. The newly qualified social worker accepted he was struggling, and the Council provided supervision, coaching, and even suggested a team move. The tribunal found no evidence that any of this was linked to his race, age, or sex.
What could the claimant have done differently? To succeed in a discrimination claim, he needed to point to specific treatment and explain why it was because of a protected characteristic. Instead, the tribunal noted his allegations were general and unsupported. The reference, which noted unsatisfactory performance, was also found to be accurate and not a breach of contract.
Why this matters
For employees, this case is a reminder that performance management of new starters is not inherently discriminatory. For employers, it confirms that offering support and documenting concerns can defend against such claims. The outcome also highlights the importance of providing clear particulars when alleging discrimination, especially when representing yourself.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal claim fails after employee stayed on for months
A solutions engineer who resigned after a performance improvement plan and grievance process lost his constructive dismissal claim because he stayed in the job too long after the alleged breaches.
Dismissed for absence without medical evidence: disability discrimination claim succeeds
A director with extreme fatigue was dismissed for unauthorised absence without any medical evidence or occupational health referral. The tribunal found unfair dismissal and disability discrimination.
Whistleblowing dismissal claim fails where performance was the real reason
A high value packer who raised concerns about a colleague's mental health was dismissed for performance issues. The tribunal found the protected disclosure was not the principal reason for dismissal, and the claim was dismissed.
72-year-old customer advisor loses constructive dismissal claim over late rota
A 72-year-old B&Q employee resigned after receiving his rota on the same day he was due to work. The tribunal dismissed his claims of constructive unfair dismissal, age discrimination, and victimisation.