A HR and Business Manager was constructively dismissed after being demoted, undermined, and subjected to a flawed grievance process lacking independence and fair procedures.

The Complainant worked as the Human Resource and Business Manager for the Respondent from November 2021 until her resignation in July 2023. Her relationship with the company deteriorated following a December 2022 incident, when she left work early for the Christmas break and was accused of attempting to take documents. Despite clarification, her return in January 2023 was met with hostility. At her annual review in January, she was demoted and accused of misconduct, including dishonesty, poor work ethic, and reckless behaviour, though no evidence was provided. Subsequently, she felt targeted and isolated. She discovered multiple documents outlining strategies for her dismissal and was subjected to derogatory remarks by senior colleagues. Despite invoking the grievance procedure, an external investigator (who liaised with one of the accused managers) largely ruled against her. Experiencing severe stress and finding no resolution, she resigned on 13 July 2023, claiming she had no alternative.

The Respondent submitted that the Company’s CEO held periodic reviews to address performance and foster company growth. During reviews in October 2022 and January 2023, he raised concerns about her conduct and professionalism. The Complainant disputed these concerns, reacting defensively and later making formal complaints alleging bullying and attempts to force her out. The CEO maintained the reviews were routine and not disciplinary, and that she was invited multiple times to engage informally to resolve matters. After receiving formal complaints from the Complainant in January 2023, the CEO responded in detail and arranged for an external consultant to manage the grievance process. However, she went on stress-related leave and never returned to work.

The Adjudicating Officer found the Complainant had been constructively dismissed. The evidence showed that the Complainant was subjected to a pattern of conduct that included unfounded allegations, a sudden demotion, internal notes discussing strategies to remove her, and a refusal to engage in mediation. These actions left her in no doubt that the Respondent wished to terminate her employment. While the Respondent claimed the Complainant was offered an appeal following a grievance process, no credible or independent appeal route was identified. The Complainant, despite engaging in internal procedures, was ultimately left unsupported and undermined in her role. It was concluded that the Respondent’s actions made it unreasonable to remain in employment. Her claim was upheld, and she was awarded €30,000 in compensation.

Employers should:                

• Avoid actions that create suspicion or undermine employee confidence, such as sharing unfounded allegations or ambiguous performance concerns. Internal notes discussing termination strategies should never be visible or created casually, as they may irreparably damage trust and suggest a predetermined outcome.        
   
  
• Ensure where a grievance is lodged against senior staff, the investigation must be independent and perceived as impartial. Don’t appoint individuals with prior involvement in the dispute to oversee the process and clearly communicate the appeal structure.
   
  
• Ensure structured appraisals with supporting evidence and advance notice. Vague, unsupported allegations can appear retaliatory and may expose the employer to risk. Fair warning and an opportunity to respond are essential before any role change or demotion.

The full case can be found here.