Social worker wins victimisation claim but unfair dismissal fails

What this case shows

This case highlights the fine line between legitimate settlement discussions and victimisation. The claimant, a newly qualified social worker on the ASYE programme, had raised protected acts including a grievance and an employment tribunal claim. When the respondent invited her to a meeting ostensibly to discuss her grievance appeal but then turned it into a without prejudice settlement meeting, the tribunal found this was an act of victimisation. The meeting was directly linked to her protected acts and was not a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute.

However, the tribunal rejected her claim that her dismissal for gross misconduct was unfair. The respondent had investigated allegations of tenancy fraud, council tax fraud, and failure to provide accurate DBS information. Although some of these matters had been looked at before, the tribunal accepted that the employer had carried out a reasonable investigation and that dismissal fell within the range of reasonable responses for a social worker in a position of trust.

What could have been done differently

The respondent could have avoided the victimisation finding by keeping the without prejudice meeting separate from the grievance process and ensuring the claimant was not pressured. A clearer distinction between settlement discussions and ongoing employment matters would have helped. For the claimant, while the victimisation claim succeeded, the dismissal claim failed because the employer's process was judged to be reasonable overall.

Why this matters

This case is a reminder that without prejudice meetings are not a free pass to target employees who have raised discrimination complaints. Employers must ensure such meetings are genuinely about settlement and not used as a tool to victimise. At the same time, employees should know that even if they have a history of protected acts, a fair misconduct dismissal can still be upheld if the employer follows a proper process.