Service engineer resigns over PPE and drug test: constructive dismissal claim fails
An employment tribunal dismissed a service engineer's claim for constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination after he resigned over a PPE dispute and a drug test he failed to complete.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
- #dyslexia
- #disability-discrimination
- #constructive-dismissal
- #ppe-dispute
- #grievance-procedure
- #occupational-health
- #drug-testing
Key facts
- The claimant was employed as a Service Engineer from 1 January 2014 until his resignation on 13 July 2021.
- The claimant had dyslexia, which was known to his father (a manager) but not to other senior managers.
- After a fuel spill incident, the respondent required the claimant to wear fire-retardant coveralls, which he found too hot.
- The claimant was referred to occupational health, where he failed to provide a urine sample for a drug test.
- The claimant submitted a grievance on 11 July 2021 and resigned two days later, citing the respondent's conduct.
- The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract and dismissed all claims.
Timeline
-
Employment started
The claimant began work as a Service Engineer for the respondent.
-
Fuel spill incident
A small amount of heavy fuel oil spilled on the claimant at a GWR site in Bristol.
-
New PPE ordered
The respondent informed the claimant that new fire-retardant coveralls would be supplied.
-
Reading site work
The claimant worked at a GWR site in Reading, wearing the new PPE for the first time. He complained about heat and lack of RAMS.
-
Video discussion
The claimant's father raised medical concerns about the PPE, leading to an occupational health referral.
-
Occupational health appointment
The claimant attended an OH assessment but failed to provide a urine sample for a drug test.
-
Grievance submitted
The claimant submitted a grievance about the drug test and PPE issues, requesting documents.
-
Disciplinary investigation invited
The claimant was asked to attend a disciplinary investigation for failing to provide a urine sample.
-
Resignation
The claimant resigned, citing unfair treatment and withholding of documents.
-
Final hearing judgment
The tribunal dismissed all claims, finding no fundamental breach of contract or disability discrimination.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the employer's conduct — requiring fire-retardant coveralls, requesting a urine sample for a drug test, and handling the grievance — amounted to a fundamental breach of trust and confidence, and whether the employer failed to make reasonable adjustments for the claimant's dyslexia.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims, including constructive unfair dismissal, automatic unfair dismissal for making a public interest disclosure, and disability discrimination.
The key reasons were:
- The requirement to wear PPE was a reasonable health and safety measure following a fuel spill.
- The drug test request was reasonable given the nature of the role and the employer's policies.
- The employer had offered to consider alternative PPE and had arranged an occupational health referral.
- There was no evidence that the employer knew about the claimant's dyslexia before the grievance, and the grievance process was not handled unreasonably.
No compensation was awarded as all claims failed.
Lessons & takeaways
- Employers can require reasonable health and safety measures like PPE, even if an employee finds them uncomfortable, as long as they consider alternatives.
- A drug test request following a safety incident is likely to be reasonable, especially if the employee's role involves safety-critical work.
- To succeed in a constructive dismissal claim, an employee must show a fundamental breach of contract — not just dissatisfaction with management decisions.
- Disability discrimination claims require the employer to have known or ought to have known about the disability; hidden conditions may not trigger a duty to adjust.
- Resigning before a grievance is concluded can weaken a constructive dismissal claim, as the employer may not have had a chance to remedy the situation.
This case shows how a series of workplace disputes — over PPE, a drug test, and a grievance — can lead an employee to resign, but not every resignation will succeed as a constructive dismissal claim. The service engineer, who had worked for AMC XL Ltd for nine years, was involved in a fuel spill at a railway site. The employer required him to wear fire-retardant coveralls, which he found too hot. He also failed to provide a urine sample for a drug test during an occupational health appointment, leading to a disciplinary investigation.
What the employer did right
The tribunal noted that the employer had legitimate health and safety reasons for the PPE requirement and had offered to consider alternatives. The drug test was part of a standard procedure following a safety incident. The employer also arranged an occupational health referral and had not yet concluded the grievance or disciplinary process when the claimant resigned. The tribunal found that the employer's actions were within the range of reasonable responses and did not amount to a fundamental breach of trust and confidence.
The disability angle
The claimant had dyslexia, which was known to his father (a manager) but not to other senior managers. The tribunal found that the employer did not know and could not reasonably be expected to know about the dyslexia until the grievance was raised. Therefore, the claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments — based on a requirement to read information immediately before a grievance hearing — failed. The claimant also relied on dyspraxia for some claims, but the tribunal had already ruled he was not disabled by dyspraxia.
Why the result matters
This case is a reminder that constructive dismissal claims require a clear breach of contract, not just a series of disagreements. Employees who resign before giving the employer a chance to address their concerns may find it harder to show a breach. For employers, the case shows that reasonable health and safety measures and a fair process — even if imperfect — can defend against such claims. The tribunal's decision also highlights the importance of employers being aware of hidden disabilities before a duty to adjust arises.
Similar cases
Constructive dismissal after flawed grievance process: DHL manager wins unfair dismissal claim
A warehouse first line manager with three years' service at DHL Services Limited resigned after a flawed grievance process. The tribunal upheld his claim for constructive unfair dismissal.
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.
Procurement director's constructive dismissal claim over whistleblowing and disability fails
A procurement director who resigned after raising concerns about commission on expired contracts has lost her tribunal claims for constructive unfair dismissal, whistleblowing detriment and disability discrimination.
Street Scene Worker's constructive dismissal claim fails over shielding dispute
A Street Scene Worker with disabilities resigned after his employer required a GP fitness letter to return from shielding. The tribunal rejected his constructive unfair dismissal and disability discrimination claims.