A former Citizens Advice solicitor, Sarah Guest, had her dismissal claim rejected following an ‘ill-judged’ comment.
- Guest criticised a new ‘Good Citizen’ award at Citizens Advice Manchester leading to internal conflict.
- The award aimed to recognise employee excellence by offering winners their birthday off.
- Guest’s comment labelled the initiative as ‘dubious’, sparking a CEO-level response.
- The tribunal found no breach of trust in the reprimand Guest received.
Sarah Guest, who served as a supervising solicitor at Citizens Advice Manchester, recently faced an employment tribunal concerning her departure from the organisation. Her claim centred on a controversial remark she made about an internal award system, described as ‘ill-judged’ by the tribunal.
In July 2023, Citizens Advice Manchester introduced a ‘Good Citizen’ award where employees nominated each month would receive their birthday off work. While this initiative was generally welcomed, Guest made her views known on the organisation’s internal platform, referring to the initiative as ‘a bit dubious’.
The CEO, Andy Brown, reacted publicly, lamenting such negativity when new initiatives are introduced. His response implied that those opposing such initiatives might not align with the organisation’s values, a comment which Guest found humiliating.
Guest was later informed by her line manager, Dan Pye, that her comments were ‘inappropriate’. The tribunal ruled that Pye’s criticism was justified and did not breach mutual trust within the organisation. Additionally, Guest acknowledged the ill-judgement of her comment during the tribunal hearing.
Employment Judge Slater highlighted that while Brown’s remarks might have been excessive, they were not sufficient to constitute a breach of trust on their own. The judgment underscored the organisation’s right to address internal dissent in line with its cultural values.
The tribunal upheld the employer’s handling of the situation, reinforcing organisational communication norms.
