A head of family law was unfairly dismissed when the firm did not pay her quarterly bonus, an employment tribunal has found. Legal executive Sarah Lightfoot-Webber, employed at Lawcomm Solicitors in Fareham, Hants, ‘considered herself to be constructively dismissed’ after her bonus of 33% of the net billing above her target was not paid.
Lightfoot-Webber said non-payment of the bonus was a breach of contract. The firm said the bonus was discretionary.
Upholding Lightfoot-Webber’s claim for unfair dismissal, first tier tribunal Judge Volkmer said it was ‘not the tribunal’s role to assist [the firm] to escape a bad bargain’.
Lightfoot-Webber said she was owed £7,035.75 based on the 33% over target figure. She said her resignation was due to the bonus structure change without consultation; the failure to make her a director as promised upon obtaining the CiLEx qualification; breach of trust and confidence; and criticism in an email also addressed to the firm’s IT consultant.
The judgment found the bonus scheme had contractual effect due to the language of entitlement; the fomulaic calucution applied ‘in a consistent, straightforward, mathematical manner’ and that the bonus had been offered ‘as part of the improved “package” to retain [Lightfoot] when she was planning to leave'.
Volkmer said though the wording of the bonus clause said it was ‘non-contractual and may be revoked or altered at any time upon immediate notice’, that only entitled the firm to alter or revoke the bonus without notice in advance of each quarter.
She added that ‘attempts to cast [Lightfoot-Webber’s] people management skills in a bad light’ were not ‘relevant’ or ‘credible' and concerns would have been raised in an earlier review, which they were not.
She said: ‘It is not the tribunal’s role to assist the [firm] to escape a bad bargain. It cannot now add further caveats to the contractual obligation.’
