A woman was unfairly dismissed by a gambling operator after she refused to take a significant pay cut, reports have shown.
Nicola Dinham was a store manager at a William Hill gambling outlet with around 20 years’ experience.
In and around July 2016, the betting operator wrote to Ms Dinham explaining that the company would be reorganising the company structure and there would be a financial impact for some members of staff.
The claimant was told that her current salary of £25,549 would be reduced to £20,721 – a pay cut of £4,828. However, she would be supplemented for a period of 12 months to ensure she was not “financially impacted”.
Ms Bingham refused to sign the new contract and, following several consultation meetings, subsequently received a letter that her contract of employment was terminated on notice.
She raises a grievance the same day, stating that she was not given the opportunity to appeal the decision. But evidence raised in court suggests that her appeal and grievance was ignored. She was ultimately dismissed for some other substantial reason.
In employment law, an employee is dismissed for ‘some other substantial reason’ if the dismissal does not refer to capability, conduct, redundancy, or contravention of a statutory duty or restriction.
In the ruling, Judge Hall-Smith concluded that the respondent had been reasonable in terms of informing employees, the consultation process involved, and the time afforded to employees. However, William Hill failed to act as a reasonable employer and acted unreasonably in dismissing the claimant for some other substantial reason.
He added that the respondent displayed unreasonable inflexibility in relation to the claimant’s position.
A remedy hearing will be listed at a later date.
MFG Solicitors can advise on employment and workplace disputes. For more information about how we could help you, please contact us.
Comments