Introduction
In a series of tribunal cases, a nurse successfully defended her claim for unfair dismissal following a suspension due to a patient’s allegation. Jessica Thorpe, a former nurse from the Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust, successfully prosecuted her case for unfair dismissal, alleging that a patient’s allegation led to a 29-month suspension. Her case takes us into how complicated employment disputes can get, especially with boundary issues, major workplace gossip, and critical procedural delays. And here’s insider information on her story, the tribunal’s findings, and what this case says about employee rights within the NHS.
Background of the Allegations
Thorpe worked with the NHS starting this year in a male-secure ward for those who have mental health illnesses and also have criminal justice involvement. On April 27, 2020, Thorpe faced her first challenge at work when a patient accused her of carrying his child. The NHS Trust suspended Thorpe on the third day following her case, pending an investigation.
Long suspension and delay in disciplinary procedures
Thorpe’s suspension was never definitive, but it experienced multiple extensions to the suspension term. After months of delay, the NHS Trust finally held a hearing on the allegations in July 2021. In the absence of clear evidence, the Trust continued keeping Thorpe suspended even after the first hearing.
However, the tribunal found no “conclusive evidence” of any malpractice on her part. An inquiry into the alleged improper relationship with the patient was not possible due to the patient’s death, and therefore, no solution was reached at this stage of the battle. The Trust did not respond adequately to Thorpe’s request to return to her workplace, resulting in her suspension.
Judgement of Employment Tribunal: Unfair Dismissal
In October 2022, the Trust wrote to Thorpe inviting her back to work. However, she resigned in November. She cited as grounds for resignation that the trust had failed to address concerns about workplace rumours and how the same affected her reputation at the workplace. She asserted that the dismissal of her concerns about workplace gossip exacerbated her dissatisfaction with the working environment.
The employment tribunal ruled in Thorpe’s favor regarding constructive unfair dismissal, breach of contract, and unlawful withholding of pay. The tribunal held that “there was no reasonable and adequate reason” for the continued suspension following the disciplinary hearing. Similarly, Employment Judge Simon Loy asserted that the NHS Trust had placed Thorpe “in double jeopardy” by preventing her from returning to work.
A New Career Path: From Nurse to Influencer
Thorpe began using an Instagram account named “Slice of Jess” during the suspension period. She built a following of over 50,000 and established her online presence on YouTube, eventually accumulating about 25,000 subscribers. As a content creator, Thorpe earned additional income through sponsored posts and advertising, which she gradually increased her earnings for.
The NHS Trust contended that Thorpe resigned based on her desire to carry out an occupation involving social media rather than return to work as a nurse. Thorpe testified that she began her social media as an avocation and that the manner in which the Trust had treated her case had significantly influenced her decision to resign.
The tribunal’s decision on social media income
The tribunal agreed that the new income that Thorpe was receiving due to her status as a social media influencer was considerable, but the case of unfair dismissal remained with her. Judge Loy seemed to feel a degree of sympathy for the NHS Trust in its stance, as her suspension did “create an opportunity to explore social media” and possibly led to her resignation from the job. Despite that, he insisted that the constructive dismissal laws are explicitly stated; further, there was no due cause from the Trust on reasonable grounds for the suspension for an extended period.
The case of Thorpe also demonstrates that employees can derive other sources of income in the course of a dispute, although her case still raises the question of whether or not employers should be vicariously liable for such actions.
Key Issues in NHS Workers and Employers
Procedural Safeguards at the End of Suspension
Suspension cases therefore must be transparent and speedy in their handling. Long suspensions require employers to give definite reasons for suspension, not to mention preventing double jeopardy by ensuring proper procedures do not delay employees unnecessarily.
Constructive Dismissal and Employee Rights
The court judgement underscores the right of workers to resign due to a hostile work environment, particularly when an employer is unable to handle disciplinary cases and fails to address the issue of a hostile work environment. Thorpe’s case shows that he felt lonely and unsupported, and a place of work needs to control rumours and provide for a respectful workplace.
Diversification of Alternative Careers Through Suspensions
Thorpe’s decision to pursue a career in social media is a prime example of this. In this sense, he exemplifies how employees on long suspensions may utilize their time to acquire new skills or pursue other careers. This means that for the employer, resolutions on suspensions would have to be workable within a shorter period to avoid losing employees with such skills to other ventures.
Legal Obligations of Communication
Informing the employees about the outcome: The employer should keep the employees updated about the progress of the disciplinary hearings and even the investigations carried out.
Thorpe’s case highlights a deficiency in communication and transparency, leading to allegations of unfair treatment and constructive dismissal.
Conclusion
The Jessica Thorpe case serves as a poignantly bitter reminder of just how important fair and open disciplinary processes are in the workplace. Of course, what set her case apart from many others involving social media were the crucial questions it raised about the obligations of employers and the rights of employees. Thorpe’s case will undoubtedly serve as a cautionary tale in the fields of employment law and human resource practice, as both NHS Trusts and other firms strive to enhance their methods.
A future hearing will determine Thorpe’s application for constructive unfair dismissal, thereby resolving her dispute with the NHS Trust. Whatever she chooses to do now with her future career in social media or her return to the health service, her case will assist other people in similar situations to understand their rights and realise other opportunities that become available should they meet professional challenges.
