Sarcastic 'thanks for popping in' comment not enough for constructive dismissal
A shift manager who resigned after her line manager's sarcastic comment and a refused flexible working request lost her constructive dismissal claim. The tribunal found she had affirmed the contract by continuing to work.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #constructive-dismissal
- #sarcastic-comment
- #flexible-working-request
- #affirmation
- #maternity-return
Key facts
- The claimant returned from maternity leave on 11 January 2021.
- The claimant signed a replacement contract identical to her original contract.
- The claimant's line manager made a sarcastic comment 'Thanks for popping in' at a meeting in February 2021.
- The claimant's flexible working request was refused after nine weeks for legitimate operational reasons.
- The claimant resigned on 29 March 2021, partly due to the sarcastic comment.
- The tribunal found the claimant affirmed the contract by continuing to work and engaging with the flexible working process after the comment.
Timeline
-
Employment started
Claimant commenced employment as a shift manager.
-
First flexible working request approved
Claimant's request for reduced hours upon return from maternity leave was approved.
-
Maternity leave started
Claimant began maternity leave.
-
Second flexible working request submitted
Claimant requested to work 06:00-12:00 weekdays for three months due to breastfeeding.
-
Return from maternity leave
Claimant returned to work; discussed flexible working with Mr Eggleton; agreement reached on temporary pattern.
-
Third flexible working request submitted
Claimant requested to work only morning or evening shifts for nine months for childcare.
-
Sarcastic comment made
At a management meeting, Mr Eggleton said 'Thanks for popping in' when claimant left at 14:00 for childcare.
-
Flexible working request outcome
Respondent offered a one-month rolling morning shift, effectively refusing the nine-month request.
-
Resignation
Claimant resigned by letter, citing the flexible working refusal and the sarcastic comment.
-
Grievance raised
Claimant raised a formal grievance about Mr Eggleton's conduct.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's conduct (a sarcastic comment and refusal of a flexible working request) amounted to a fundamental breach of contract, and whether the claimant had affirmed the contract before resigning.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed the claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
Key reasons:
- The sarcastic comment 'Thanks for popping in' was inappropriate but did not amount to a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence.
- The flexible working request was refused for legitimate operational reasons after a reasonable process.
- Crucially, the claimant affirmed the contract by continuing to work for nearly two months after the comment and by engaging with the flexible working process.
No compensation was awarded as the claim was dismissed.
Lessons & takeaways
- If you believe your employer has fundamentally breached your contract, you should resign promptly or at least make clear you are reserving your rights. Continuing to work normally can be seen as affirming the contract.
- A single sarcastic comment, while unpleasant, is unlikely to be enough to justify constructive dismissal unless it is part of a pattern of behaviour that destroys trust and confidence.
- Employers who follow a fair process when refusing flexible working requests and who can show legitimate business reasons are likely to defend such claims successfully.
- Claimants who represent themselves face an uphill battle, especially when the respondent has legal representation and the legal issues are nuanced.
When a 'sarcastic comment' isn't enough
This case shows the high bar for constructive dismissal claims. The claimant, a shift manager with two years' service, returned from maternity leave to find her line manager made a sarcastic comment when she left a meeting early for childcare. She also had a flexible working request refused after nine weeks. She resigned two months later, citing these issues.
The tribunal accepted the comment was inappropriate but found it did not destroy the relationship of trust and confidence. The flexible working refusal was handled properly, with a risk assessment and a legitimate operational reason. Most importantly, the claimant had affirmed the contract by continuing to work and engaging with the process after the comment.
What the employer did right
XPO Logistics followed a reasonable process: they conducted a risk assessment, communicated with the claimant, and gave a clear business reason for refusing the long-term request. They also offered a temporary alternative. This contrasts with cases where employers ignore requests or act unreasonably.
Key lesson for employees
If you feel your employer has fundamentally breached your contract, you must act quickly. Continuing to work without protest can waive your right to claim constructive dismissal. The tribunal noted the claimant worked for nearly two months after the comment and even raised a grievance after resigning, which was too late.
This case also highlights the importance of legal representation. The claimant represented herself against a solicitor, and the nuanced legal arguments around affirmation and breach were difficult to navigate alone.
Similar cases
Flexible working refusal based on incorrect facts led to constructive dismissal for heritage project manager
A tribunal found that the British Deaf Association constructively dismissed a heritage project manager after refusing her flexible working request based on incorrect facts, awarding £17,678.70 in compensation.
Hotel night worker's constructive dismissal claim struck out after delay in resigning
A tribunal struck out a constructive unfair dismissal claim from a night team member who waited 2.5 months after the last alleged breach before resigning, finding he had affirmed the contract.
Head of Finance loses constructive dismissal claim after refusing return to office
A tribunal has ruled that a YMCA's request for a senior manager to return to blended working did not breach her contract, dismissing her claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
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.