In part 1,¹ I shared an article from The Guardian with the headline:

"Senior staff can sue if given ‘low status’ desk, UK tribunal rules."

My instinctive reaction was not particularly complimentary of the employee, NW, who had sued his employer.

But let's change things up a little, and try to put ourselves in NW's shoes.

--

NW was employed by an estate agency, and was the manager of the branch in town R.

He was then moved to a less-successful branch in town C, because SR had been recruited to take over his role in the town R branch.² His boss admitted that NW had effectively been "mothballed".

When NW first moved over, his pay included commission based on branch R's revenue. About 15 months later, he received a letter setting out a new commission structure which did not take into account branch R. But the very next day, he was told that he should ignore the letter as SR had resigned.³

NW was then asked to return to branch R. He felt unsettled.

Around this time, his boss decided to split NW's role up, to be shared between NW and MG (a more junior colleague). However, NW was not told, and he assumed that he would be going back to his old role.

The desk at branch R that NW used to sit at was significant, practically (as it was where the books and ledgers were kept) and symbolically (it was where the branch manager traditionally sat). NW's boss was not aware of the symbolic significance.⁴

While NW was away from branch R, MG (who was an "ambitious person")⁵ had moved to NW's old desk. MG told NW that NW would be sitting at a new desk. NW understood this to mean that MG would be the branch manager, and NW would be the assistant manager.

NW raised the issue to his boss, who did not understand that NW was concerned about his status at branch R being undermined. His boss concluded that NW had found alternative employment with a competitor.⁶

NW's boss met with NW. NW's boss arrived angry and upset, but did not understand (a) why NW was upset; or (b) that he had not properly communicated with NW about sharing the branch manager position with MG.

The meeting escalated. Words were exchanged, and NW's boss raised his voice and swore at him.⁷ NW's boss gave him an ultimatum: move to branch R, or face disciplinary action.

NW threatened to resigned. His boss told him to "go on then".

He did.

--

Put aside the law for a second. Who now thinks, from a practical and commonsensical point of view, that NW was fairly treated?

In part 3, I'll share some practical takeaways for both employers and employees.