The secretary to the managing director of a major drugs company has been awarded £22,500 for constructive dismissal by the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Ms Frances Leeson claimed she had been constructively dismissed by Glaxo Wellcome Ltd because of the bullying behaviour of her superior.
The tribunal did not go into the detail of Ms Leeson's claims. It accepted that "she was not entirely blameless in the matter, but on balance we find it was a constructive dismissal". It said the working relationship between the two involved had been bad. While it was a matter for both to address the problem, "primary responsibility rested with the employer".
Earlier Ms Leeson told the tribunal she had had a good working relationship with the former managing director, who trusted her. Her working day was from 8.30 a.m. to 4.30 p.m., but she would often work late if necessary. Mr Stephen Dorman's predecessor had indicated she could be flexible as regards her working hours.
After Mr Dorman was appointed in September 1996 she found she was much busier, and her relationship with him deteriorated. On January 30th, 1997, Mr Dorman spoke to her in a bullying and offensive manner for perceived failings regarding timekeeping and absenteeism.
On February 3rd, 1997, she was further reprimanded with "insulting and humiliating remarks" regarding a presentation she had prepared for him. "He clenched his teeth and fists and said `You need training'," the tribunal was told.
There was a further incident on February 7th when Mr Dorman said he wished to speak to her about her performance, timekeeping, absenteeism, delays and inefficiency. Ms Leeson said she had a dental appointment and left.
A consultant psychiatrist, Dr Julian Byers, gave evidence that Ms Leeson was depressed as a result of the relationship with her boss. He said that even if she had been relocated in the company she would live in constant anxiety of him. She finally left the company on October 29th, 1997, after almost 12 years' service,
Glaxo Wellcome said Mr Dorman did not engage in bullying, intimidation or harassing behaviour towards the claimant, and every effort had been made to resolve the problem. Mr Dorman said the company was facing a challenging period. He offered to be flexible with regard to time in lieu when Ms Leeson worked late.