Serious failings in the investigation process
In the case of Clifton Diocese v Miss Janet Parker, Miss Parker was employed by the Diocese as Head of Finance. The role was not a ‘reserved’ role requiring the post holder to be of the Catholic faith.
Flexible working request
During a period of adoption leave, Miss Parker requested to return to work for three days a week, to fit with her child’s nursery sessions. A meeting was held with Miss Parker’s line manager in July 2021. The request for flexible working was declined by her line manager who insisted the role could not be done part time. During the meeting, performance issues were first raised with Miss Parker.
Disciplinary investigation
In August 2021, the performance issues escalated and a disciplinary investigation was undertaken into the actions of Miss Parker which were described as ‘potential competency issues’. Miss Parker was invited to a disciplinary investigation meeting, and she refused because she was still on adoption leave and would not be returning to work until September 2021. Miss Parker was subsequently suspended on full pay.
Grievance
On the 31 August 2021, Miss Parker raised a grievance against her line manager. The grievance was heard in October and dismissed.
Disciplinary hearing
The disciplinary investigation proceeded in Miss Parker’s absence. The investigation set out numerous failings by Miss Parker that had not been the subject of detailed allegations put to Miss Parker. A disciplinary hearing was arranged for October 2021 and Miss Parker was dismissed.
Employment tribunal (ET) claims
Miss Parker brought claims of unfair dismissal and discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief. The ET found the dismissal was unfair, to the extent that they found the treatment of Miss Parker appalling. In particular, no reasonable employer could have regarded the allegations against Miss Parker as constituting ‘serious negligence’ so as to amount to gross misconduct.
Serious failings in the investigation process
The ET also found religious discrimination, relating to the acts of the investigator. This related to the serious failures in the investigation process which they determined was rushed, failed to take into account Miss Parker’s ill health and the fact Miss Parker was mocked during the disciplinary hearing which amounted to harassment.
The employment appeal tribunal (EAT) has since allowed an appeal against the findings of direct religion or belief discrimination on the basis the original tribunal had applied the burden of proof incorrectly. The case has been remitted for reconsideration.
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 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.