ET Sides with Co-Op but Says Claimant Suffered a Detriment Due to Protected Disclosure

An Employment Tribunal has passed judgment in the case of a former senior executive (the claimant*) at the Co-operative Group who brought Employment Tribunal claims for whistleblowing and unfair dismissal against her former employer.

According to the claimant, she had been sacked from her role at the Co-operative Group after she allegedly uncovered corporate malpractice at the retailer. She subsequently brought claims for unfair dismissal and whistleblowing against the Co-operative Group, alleging that she had been dismissed because she had raised concerns that 70 per cent of its spending did not comply with its own procedures.

Brief Facts of the Case 

The claimant was hired by the Co-operative Group in 2014 as Chief Executive of the organisation, after the former Chief Executive Euan Sutherland had left and the business was on the verge of collapse, having discovered a £1.5 billion black hole in its finances. She was hired on a £300,000 per annum wage to cut costs at the business, having successfully undertaken a similar role with Royal Mail.

Upon commencing employment with the Co-op, the claimant hired a consultancy group, Silver Lining Partners, to help produce plans to cut costs at the organisation, However, it was later alleged by the Co-operative Group that she had not followed the proper procedures in hiring the firm.

She was subsequently suspended on these allegations and amid concerns regarding her performance and clashes with other senior executives at the organisation. It was also discovered by the Co-operative Group that she had left her previous employer after concerns had been raised that Silver Lining Partners, whom she had also hired while working at Royal Mail, had been overcharging the postal group.

The Co-operative Group later dismissed the claimant for performance-related reasons.

What The Employment Tribunal Said 

Last week the Employment Tribunal passed down judgment in the case, dismissing the claimant’s unfair dismissal claim and dismissal due to a protected disclosure claim. However, they upheld a claim that she had been subjected to a detriment because she had made a protected disclosure.

The Tribunal ruled that the Co-operative Group “deliberately failed to pay the claimant’s legitimate claims for expenses within a reasonable period” and, by doing so, “subjected her to a detriment on the grounds that she made protected disclosures.” In dismissing the claim that the claimant had been fired for raising protected disclosures, the Tribunal held that the Co-operative Group were already aware of the concerns that were raised and that her dismissal had not been wholly, or principally, on the grounds of her protected disclosure.

A remedy hearing will be listed at a future date to determine what compensation the claimant is entitled to.

The Co-operative Group commented on the claim: “We are glad that the tribunal has supported our view. We fought this action because it was the right thing to do and in the interests of our members. We would like to thank our members for their support”

Our Lawyers View

Chris Hadrill, a specialist employment solicitor at Redmans Solicitors, commented on the claim: “Businesses must take care to fairly, promptly, and thoroughly deal with any whistleblowing complaints made by employees and to ensure that the outcome to any investigation is also fair, prompt, and thorough. It is unlawful to subject an employee to a detriment or dismiss them because they have blown the whistle.”

*Name redacted upon request