Operations manager's unfair dismissal claims rejected

Thursday 03 December 2020

A multi-site operations manager who claimed she had been bullied by her senior manager has seen her unfair constructive dismissal rejected by the Employment & Discrimination Tribunal.

Sophie Streeter was employed by Sandpiper between 15 April 2015 and 28 June 2019.

She resigned with notice on 29 May 2019 before submitting a further 'resignation' specifically alleging constructive dismissal on 28 June, her final working day. 

In the Tribunal, Miss Streeter said there were three reasons behind her resignation that amounted to constructive dismissal:

(1) health and safety issues, which came into focus after Miss Streeter fell up the stairs at work while carrying boxes and hurt her knee in May 2018

(2) a contractual dispute with her employer in 2017

(3) bullying and harassment in the workplace during the last 18 months of her employment

She drew the Tribunal's attention to the consequences of a poor stocktake result in October 2018 that she maintained was used to "belittle" her in her managerial role. 

In addition, Miss Streeter said it was unfair that she had been formally disciplined following a burglary at the George store in St Martin's on 14 January 2019, during which the safe had been accessed after the keys to it were left in an unsecure location.

Pictured: Miss Streeter's claim against Sandpiper for personal injury in the workplace is still ongoing. 

She argued that another store in Jersey also kept the safe keys in an unsecure location, but nobody there had been disciplined. Miss Streeter said that because she then introduced the subsequent security measures to keep the safe keys secure, the disciplinary process was unjustified. 

Miss Streeter also argued that the new contract she received on 22 December 2017 required Sandpiper to review her salary in February 2019 and increase it to a specified amount, however this was not done by the given time.

She contested that her accident at work was relevant to her constructive dismissal because the company had failed to ensure a safe working environment and had failed to implement their "well working" policy. 

Miss Streeter told the Tribunal that she worked excessive hours with insufficient staff support and was bullied by her senior manager, who constantly criticised her, leading to increasing levels of stress and anxiety.

Several colleagues appeared as witnesses in relation to this, offering mixed responses. One described the senior manager as a bully who “always had a negative opinion” of Miss Streeter; another described her as “rude and cold”, but not a bully; while another said there was no evidence of bullying and that Miss Streeter’s disciplinary process had been handled “by the book”.

Sandpiper Managing Director Stephen Forrester, who gave evidence for the company, said there was no contractual breach that could amount to constructive dismissal, no bullying or harassment, and that the accident at work in 2018 was so long ago that it evidently had no influence on Miss Streeter's decision to resign.

He asserted in his closing speech that the former employee had not been bullied and that she had not told her employer anything about her health and safety concerns before she submitted her grievance. Mr Forrester also stated that Miss Streeter's resignation was on the same day as her "return to work" interview and that she had never asked for any mediation to take place.

Pictured: Miss Streeter worked across multiple Sandpiper sites as an Operations Manager. 

Tribunal Chairman Crown Advocate Jason Hill concluded that some of the "problems" during Miss Streeter's time working for Sandpiper were "of her own making" and could not be ignored by her line manager. 

"What most struck the Tribunal was that the applicant reacted badly to criticism, especially when delivered by [her senior manager]. The Tribunal is satisfied that during the applicant's employment there were problems, sometimes of her own making and sometimes not, that required managerial involvement and comment.

"The Tribunal finds that the contractual issue relied on by the applicant related to events in 2017 and was effectively resolved by the signing of the new contract.

"Similarly, the health and safety issues relied upon by the applicant following her accident at work in May 2018 are of too general a nature and do not amount to a repudiatory breach by the respondent.

"What remains, therefore, is the allegation of bullying and whether the applicant can rely upon the "last straw" doctrine. The Tribunal finds that the behaviour of [her Senior Manager] complained of by the applicant in support of her allegations of bullying is simply not supported by the other witnesses.

"What the Tribunal finds is that she was obliged to make adverse remarks to the applicant from time to time about things that had happened in stores managed by the applicant and that the applicant either did not agree with those remarks or simply did not like them. The Tribunal finds that this does not amount to bullying and did not amount to a repudiatory breach of the contract of employment."