Veitch Penny LLP - Exeter | Crediton, Devon

Case

H M Prison Service v Barua
Employment Appeal Tribunal (15 November 2006)

Issues

(1) Grievance procedure;
(2) Employment Tribunal time limits;
(3) The Employment Act 2002 (Dispute Resolution) Regulations 2004 (“the Regulations”)

Facts

The Regulations introduced the statutory minimum procedures to be used in disciplinary, dismissal or grievance situations. This case looks at the application of Regulation 15, which states that, in certain circumstances, if an employee submits a grievance within the normal time limit, the time limit for presenting a claim is extended automatically for a further three months.

Dr Barua had been employed as a Medical Officer working in a prison in Nottinghamshire. His employer reduced his pay in February 2005 to which Dr Barua protested but no change was made. On 25 April 2005 he gave written notice of his resignation to take effect from 31 July 2005.

Dr Barua then lodged a grievance in June of that year in respect of the reduction in pay. He met with his employers on 12 August. He then received a letter which effectively upheld his grievance, offering him an apology and reimbursement. He did not respond to the letter and no payment was made. He took no further steps to pursue the grievance but nearly six months after his employment had ended, he brought a claim at the Employment Tribunal for unfair constructive dismissal, breach of contract and unlawful deduction of wages.

In the employer’s response to his claim, it was argued that the claim was submitted out of time and that in the circumstances he could not rely upon the extension of time.

Decision

On appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) they considered the interpretation of Regulation 15 but held that the raising of the grievance, although prior to termination, did permit the employee to take advantage of the three month extension of time under the Regulations.

Comments

In this case (and affirmed in London Borough of Lewisham v Colbourne), the EAT has interpreted the Resolutions so as to encourage employees to try and resolve their complaint internally. It was stated that if a grievance presented before resignation did not trigger an extension of time, then this could discourage employees from raising grievances at an early stage when the matters at issue are more likely to be resolvable.

Given that almost any written complaint from an employee can be a grievance, this case confirms that employers must be alert to the need to deal with all complaints promptly.

Rachel Billen - Associate Solicitor, Commercial Department at Veitch Penny.
Tel: 01392 278381, Fax: 01392 410247, Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

This Employment Law Update does not constitute legal or other professional advice and should not be relied on as such. You should take specific advice regarding your circumstances before taking any action based on the information contained within this Update.