If your employer refuses to hear your grievance, that can break your contract
“Constructive dismissalWhen your employer's behaviour is so serious that you feel you have no choice but to resign, the law may treat that resignation as a dismissal. The most common basis is a fundamental breach of the imp... and disability discrimination claims upheld; whistleblowingMaking a disclosure about wrongdoing in your workplace, such as a health and safety risk, a criminal act, or a miscarriage of justice. If the disclosure qualifies as protected, the law gives you signi... detrimentAny action your employer takes that puts you at a disadvantage, short of dismissal. In a whistleblowing or discrimination context, being moved to a worse role, excluded from meetings, or given an unfa... claim dismissed.”
Refusing to hear a genuine grievanceA formal complaint raised by an employee against their employer, triggering a legal obligation to investigate and respond. is not just poor process. It can amount to a breach of your employment contract.
- Check exactly what your employer's grievance policy excludes before accepting that your grievance cannot be heard, a narrow exclusion is often stretched too far.
- Keep a written record of every grievance you raise and every response you get, including silence.
- If your employer keeps refusing to engage and you are considering resigning, get advice first so you understand your position before you act.
The situation
A university employee was suspended from her role while an investigation was carried out into a schools contract she had worked on. She raised a formal grievance about the suspension and the decision to investigate her. Her employer refused to deal with the grievance, saying its policy did not allow grievances connected to disciplinary matters. When she raised a second grievance about how the first one had been handled, that was refused too. She also raised a separate whistleblowing concern that went unanswered. She resigned, saying the trust between her and her employer had broken down completely.
What the tribunal found
The tribunal found that the university's policy exclusion did not actually cover what had happened. The exclusion was meant to stop people grieving about the outcome of a disciplinary process, not about the decision to suspend or investigate someone in the first place. Because the university refused to hear grievances it should have heard, the tribunal held it breached an implied termA term that forms part of your employment contract even though it is not written down. The duty of mutual trust and confidence is the most important implied term, but others include the duty to pay wa... in the employment contract: that an employer will reasonably and promptly give an employee a proper opportunity to have a grievance heard. That failure, combined with the suspension itself and the mishandling of her whistleblowing concern, amounted to a fundamental breach of contractWhen one party to an employment contract fails to comply with one of its terms without a lawful reason. Your employer breaching a significant term of your contract can entitle you to resign and claim .... The tribunal upheld her claim for constructive unfair dismissalA legal claim you can bring if your employer dismissed you without a fair reason or without following a fair process. You normally need two years of continuous employment to qualify, though some dismi... (s.95(1)(c) and s.98 Employment Rights Act 1996The primary piece of legislation setting out employees rights in the UK, including the right not to be unfairly dismissed, the right to a written statement of employment particulars, and rights relati...) and her disability discrimination claim for failure to make reasonable adjustmentsChanges an employer must make under the Equality Act 2010 for a disabled employee, where without them the employee would be at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled colleagues. What coun.... Her whistleblowing detriment claim did not succeed.
Dr S Stothard v Durham University, Case No. 2500306/2019, Employment Tribunal (Newcastle upon Tyne), reserved judgment following a hearing on 16-18 March 2020.