Irretrievable breakdown in relationship

The case of Ms Anne-Marie Alexis v Westminster Drug Project examines whether length of service, or alternatives to dismissal, are relevant in a case where trust and confidence has already irretrievably broken down between the parties.

Background

Ms Alexis was employed as a receptionist/administrator at the Westminster Drug Project. Ms Alexis’s employer was aware that she had dyslexia and that she should receive 25% additional time for any future exams or interviews.

Reduction in posts

In 2020, a restructuring exercise was undertaken with a view to reducing the three existing receptionist/administrator posts to two new posts. The selection was based on a competitive interview. Ms Alexis did not request any adjustments to the process; however, she was sent copies of the questions fifteen minutes before the first interview. Unfortunately, she was not aware they had been sent and had only received the questions relating to the second of the two interviews ten minutes in advance. Ms Alexis was unsuccessful in the selection process.

Grievance

Ms Alexis raised a grievance in relation to the conduct of the interviews, stating she should have received the questions 24 hours in advance on the interview. The redundancy process was placed on hold while the grievance was considered. The decision-maker upheld Ms Alexis’s grievance on the basis she had not been told she was being provided with the questions in advance and she was provided with the opportunity of a fresh interview.

Ms Alexis appealed the decision, which was considered in January 2021. On receipt of the outcome, which confirmed she should be re-interviewed, Ms Alexis responded with a series of three emails to the decision maker, taking issue with the decision. She also sent three emails to the chairman complaining about the appeal. The decision maker of the appeal provided further options for Ms Alexis, two of which she could not decide between and arguing that both discriminated against her, based on the fact she wanted the questions 24 hours in advance.

Breakdown in the employment relationship

In February 2021, Ms Alexis was invited to a meeting to discuss whether her continued employment was tenable. The meeting was to address:

• Her perceived unmanageability.
• Her rehearsing of complaints that had already been dealt with and her inability to accept the grievance outcome.
• Her actions which were causing an unsustainable demand on HR and management, including executive time and resources.
• The belief that relations, trust and confidence between her and her employer had irretrievably broken down.

A letter confirming the outcome of the meeting was sent to Ms Alexis, confirming a view had been reached that Ms Alexis was not accepting the outcome of the grievance and the delay was not fair on the organisation and the other two applicants. Further, Ms Alexis had shown no confidence in her employers and the relationship had irretrievably broken down. Her employment was therefore terminated with 11 weeks’ notice with no requirement to work out her notice.

Employment tribunal (ET) claims

Ms Alexis brought claims of disability related harassment, failure to make reasonable adjustments, dismissal arising from disability, victimisation based on her grievance and unfair dismissal.

The ET considered whether the dismissal was fair and found that the employer had genuinely and reasonably believed in the irretrievable breakdown in relationship. Further, Ms Alexis had been given the opportunity to put forward her view. The dismissal was therefore fair. The remaining claims were not well-founded, or out of jurisdiction.

Appeal

Ms Alexis appealed the unfair dismissal claim on the basis the employer had not given sufficient consideration to her length of service or the alternative outcome of a warning. The employment appeal tribunal (EAT) dismissed the appeal, finding that an alternative to dismissal and length of service was not relevant given the decision maker’s finding that trust and confidence had already irretrievably broken down between the parties.

Need support with your HR?

Our support means you can focus on education, while we take care of your organisation’s HR needs.

Whether you need help with appraisals, advice on managing a disciplinary or grievance, or guidance on statutory obligations, our education HR specialists can support your school with a flexible and cost-effective service. Get in touch about how we can help you.

The grievance section of our CEFMi website contains model policies, related model letters, information and a grievance procedure flowchart. Get a free trial of CEFMi – a comprehensive resource for school managers containing over 7,000 pages of text, including over 170 policies written specifically for schools.