Engineer who felt "unappreciated" loses constructive dismissal claim

Monday 26 February 2024

An engineer with a deep freeze company who resigned because "he felt he could not work somewhere he was not appreciated" has lost a claim for constructive dismissal.

Neil Le Boustouler had worked for Jersey Deep Freeze for more than 17 years when he decided to leave after a meeting with one of the company directors to discuss claims that his salary and package should be improved.

Mr Le Boustouler had become aware of the extent of a dividend payment which the company's other six employees – who were all shareholders – received and how it compared with a £500 Christmas bonus he received.

On May 1 last year he presented the directors with a three-page document setting out his grievances, and asking for additional holiday and unpaid leave, a pay increase and a bonus.

The Employment Tribunal heard that before the meeting began, there was an informal discussion at which one of the directors, Andrew Duquemin, tried to explain the difference between Mr Le Boustouler's skillset and those of his colleagues whose job was primarily to carry out more demanding repair work.

Pictured: The case was heard by the Employment and Discrimination Tribunal.

As a result of that meeting, Mr Le Boutouler told the Employment Tribunal that he felt worthless, and he subsequently tendered his resignation.

Giving the Tribunal's decision, its chair Dr Elena Moran rejected the suggestion that the disparity in pay, bonus and holiday between Mr Le Boustouler and the employee shareholders was unfair, or a fundamental breach of the implied term of trust and confidence; and she said that the comparison between pay and bonus, and the dividend paid to shareholders was not a valid one.

Dr Moran said: "The nub of the complaint is really that Mr Le Boustouler was not offered the opportunity to buy shares.

"He accepted at the hearing that his skillset was not comparable with that of the shareholder employees and as a result he was not capable of undertaking a significant percentage of the company’s work.

"This does not mean that Mr Le Boustouler was not good at the installation work, just that he was not skilled in the more technically difficult reactive work."

She continued: "Ultimately Mr Le Boustouler felt that his 17 years of service to the Company warranted him getting a bigger slice of the pie than he was currently contractually entitled to. His employer disagreed with his analysis; that is not a basis upon which to resign and claim constructive unfair dismissal."