Transport director's constructive dismissal claim fails after sick pay dispute
A transport director with 20 years' service lost her constructive unfair dismissal claim after resigning over a sick pay dispute and an investigatory meeting. The tribunal found no repudiatory breach of contract.
2 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Key facts
- The claimant was employed by the respondent from 2000 until her resignation on 18 May 2020.
- The claimant was Transport Director until March 2019, then Head of Networks and Commercial.
- The claimant resigned after a dispute over sick pay and an investigatory meeting regarding contact with a deceased colleague's family.
- The tribunal found the claimant did not establish a last straw event or a repudiatory breach of contract.
- The sex discrimination claims were either out of time or lacked evidence of less favourable treatment due to sex.
Timeline
-
External audit report
Encompass Universal Limited audit revealed serious compliance issues at the respondent.
-
Claimant placed on restricted duties
Following the audit, the claimant was put on restricted duties as an alternative to suspension.
-
Variation to contract offered
The respondent offered the claimant a new role as Head of Pallet Track and Commercial on same salary.
-
Claimant started new role
The claimant began working as Head of Networks and Commercial.
-
Christmas bonus awarded
The claimant received a £2000 bonus; Lee Crank received £8000.
-
COVID-19 sick pay policy updated
The respondent issued a policy that isolating employees would only receive SSP.
-
Claimant off sick with chest infection
The claimant was absent from work due to a chest infection.
-
Investigatory meeting
The respondent held a meeting with the claimant regarding allegations of contact with a deceased colleague's family.
-
Pay breakdown email
Becky Quigley sent the claimant a detailed breakdown of pay for absence periods, showing SSP for some days.
-
Claimant resigned
The claimant verbally resigned to Paul Kamel and confirmed in writing, citing fundamental breach of contract.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant was constructively dismissed (unfair dismissal) and whether the respondent directly discriminated against her on grounds of sex.
The outcome
The tribunal dismissed all claims. It found that the claimant was not constructively dismissed because the alleged last straw events (sick pay dispute and investigatory meeting) did not amount to a repudiatory breach of contract. The sex discrimination claims were either presented out of time or lacked evidence of less favourable treatment due to sex.
- No compensation awarded as all claims failed.
- Claims for unlawful deductions from wages and holiday pay were settled by agreement.
Lessons & takeaways
- A constructive dismissal claim requires a final 'last straw' event that is part of a series of acts amounting to a repudiatory breach; a single dispute over sick pay may not suffice.
- Time limits for discrimination claims are strict; claims must be brought within three months of the act complained of, or a tribunal may refuse to extend time.
- Long service does not automatically make a resignation constructive; the employee must show the employer fundamentally breached the contract of employment.
- Allegations of sex discrimination need clear evidence of less favourable treatment because of sex; perceived unfairness alone is not enough.
A long career ends in dispute
The claimant had worked for Kammac Limited for 20 years, rising to Transport Director. In 2019, following an external audit, she was placed on restricted duties and later moved to a different role on the same salary. She felt sidelined and suspected that the managing director's son-in-law, Craig Olson, had a personal dislike of her. Despite reassurances from the managing director, tensions simmered.
The final breakdown came in 2020. The claimant was off sick with a chest infection during the early COVID-19 pandemic. The company had updated its sick pay policy to pay only statutory sick pay (SSP) for those isolating. The claimant disputed her pay and was sent a breakdown showing SSP for some days. Separately, she was invited to an investigatory meeting about her contact with a deceased colleague's family. She resigned shortly after, claiming these events were the last straw in a series of breaches.
Why the tribunal rejected the claim
The tribunal carefully examined whether the sick pay dispute and the investigatory meeting, individually or together, amounted to a repudiatory breach of contract. It concluded they did not. The pay issue was a disagreement over policy interpretation, not a fundamental breach. The investigatory meeting was a reasonable step by the employer to look into a workplace matter. Without a clear last straw, the constructive dismissal claim failed.
The sex discrimination claims also fell short. Many allegations were out of time, and those within time lacked evidence that the claimant was treated less favourably because of her sex. The tribunal noted that the claimant's own evidence did not support a finding of direct discrimination.
What this means for similar claims
This case highlights the high bar for constructive dismissal. An employee who resigns must show that the employer's conduct was so serious it destroyed the trust and confidence essential to the employment relationship. A single dispute over pay or a routine investigatory meeting is unlikely to meet that threshold, especially if the employer has acted reasonably. For discrimination claims, the importance of timely action and solid evidence cannot be overstated.
Similar cases
Constructive unfair dismissal claim fails after employer followed proper grievance process
A maintenance worker with 11 years' service resigned after his employer investigated and responded to his grievance. The tribunal found the process was fair and dismissed his constructive unfair dismissal claim.
Client Services Director loses constructive dismissal claim after resigning over sick pay and alleged sex discrimination
A Client Services Director who resigned over unpaid sick pay and a claimed promotion of a male colleague has lost her constructive dismissal and sex discrimination claims. The tribunal found no fundamental breach of contract.
Mask exemption and redeployment: constructive dismissal claim fails
A QA operative with six years' service resigned after his grievance was rejected, claiming constructive unfair dismissal. The tribunal found the employer had reasonable and proper cause for all its actions.
Sex discrimination claim dismissed as out of time in constructive dismissal case
An engineering team leader's sex discrimination claim was thrown out because it was presented too late, while his constructive unfair dismissal claim also failed on the merits.