MOrsel: why honesty is often the best policy..... even when it is a difficult message

Employers may think they are doing an employee a service by not telling them the “real” reason for a dismissal. However the downside of doing this was keenly felt by an employer in a recent case before the Employment Appeal Tribunal (Rawlinson v Brightside Group Ltd UKEAT/0142/17), when this failure to grasp the nettle meant that by misleading an employee about the reason for his dismissal, the employee was successful in his claim that the employer had breached the implied term of trust and confidence.

The “real” reason for dismissal had been revealed by a subject access request and the outcome of not giving the "real" reason to the employee was to achieve the opposite of the employer’s intentions: rather than working his notice, the employee walked out; there was no-one to provide the desired orderly hand-over of work; legal costs; and the award of a claim.

Whilst the particular facts are not ones that would apply in the Channel Islands (as it was a TUPE situation) the underlying message of the case is one that is important for all CI employers: that there is an obligation not to mislead which forms part of the implied term of trust and confidence. How often is the real reason for not being honest to an employee actually about not wanting to have a difficult conversation. When employers are not candid, regardless of motive, there can be very real unintended consequences.