HeartBrain

Resolve

Know where you stand when work becomes difficult.

A detailed assessment of your workplace situation, evidence, options and next steps, checked against official UK employment sources.

Fast to create

Ready in minutes

Copy, paste your story and documents, press a button.

One-offNo subscription requiredHeartBrain account required
Create my free HeartBrain accountComing soonSee the sample assessment

Case Analysis Pass

£27.99

one-off · analyse one workplace case

  • Full Explore, Consider and Formal journey
  • 10 report updates and 10 questions
  • Evidence and source checking
  • Permanent read and download access
  • Share with a partner employment lawyer, if you choose

HeartBrain is free to join.

The Resolve Timeline is free; Analysis is optional and paid. Your own situation is not analysed until you have paid and explicitly ask Resolve to create an assessment.

Using Resolve for an organisation?

Who Resolve helps

Designed for the questions that are hard to untangle alone.

01

Grievance or disciplinary action

02

Bullying, harassment or unfair treatment

03

Dismissal, redundancy or settlement concerns

04

Evidence, process, timing or urgent deadlines

How it works

Four simple steps

From sign-in to a detailed assessment, without a single form full of jargon.

  1. 1

    Sign in to HeartBrain

    Your free account is your key to Resolve.

  2. 2

    Start your free Timeline

    Record incidents or paste your account and attach evidence.

    Takes minutes, not days
  3. 3

    Choose paid Analysis

    Review the price and buy a one-off case pass when ready.

  4. 4

    Create your source-checked assessment

    A detailed report, ready in minutes.

Your story, in your words

“In March my manager began excluding me from meetings. On 12 April I raised it in writing and nothing changed…”

contract.pdftext messagesmeeting notes
Create my assessmentComing soon

Your assessment is ready

Checked against official UK sources

Copy, paste, press a button. Most people finish in minutes.

Sample assessment

Sample assessment

HeartBrain Resolve

Mr J Doe · AnOtherCompany Ltd

Sample report
Explore

Advice Note

Case position · Contested

The matter is classified as Contested because while your email of 8 July 2026 constitutes a qualifying protected disclosure regarding statutory driver hours and road safety under Section 43B of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the employer possesses documentary evidence showing client service level breaches and escalations dating back to June 2026. This gives the employer a plausible alternative explanation for increased managerial scrutiny. Furthermore, your acute stress and migraines, having arisen in July 2026, do not yet meet the statutory 12-month long-term requirement to qualify as a disability under Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, and you previously declined an Occupational Health referral.

Assessment reliability · Medium

Confidence is Medium because key factual elements depend on whether Sarah Jenkins' actions were motivated by your protected disclosure or legitimate operational escalation from Kestrel Retail, which requires disclosure of internal management communications. Additionally, medical evidence confirming the long-term prognosis of your migraines and stress is required to establish whether disability protections apply.

What this means for you. You are currently employed as an Operations Team Lead and wish to resolve workplace disputes informally while preserving your employment. Your primary claims concern whistleblowing detriment under Section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 following your 8 July 2026 disclosure regarding driver hours compliance, alongside potential health and disability discrimination issues under the Equality Act 2010. While your protected disclosure is well supported by contemporaneous documentation, the employer has pre-existing performance records regarding client service level shortfalls that will form their defence. Immediate priorities include maintaining an accurate record of events, managing occupational health engagement constructively, and adhering to internal grievance processes before considering external conciliation.

Evidence

3 of 4 · Reasonable

You possess written copies of the 8 July 2026 email and subsequent communications. However, the employer holds contemporaneous records, including client escalation emails from June and July 2026 and meeting notes, demonstrating pre-existing contractual delivery failures.

Facts behind this rating:
  • Email sent on 8 July 2026 regarding driver limits [D8]
  • Kestrel Retail escalation notice received on 2 July 2026 [D7]
  • File note of 1:1 meeting on 14 July 2026 [D1]

Most useful action: Collate all written correspondence demonstrating that increased scrutiny and task allocations directly followed your disclosure rather than client performance issues.[23][64][68]

The law

3 of 4 · Reasonable

Your communication on 8 July 2026 satisfies Section 43B(1)(a), (b), and (d) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 as a disclosure of information tending to show breach of legal obligations and health and safety dangers. However, establishing disability under Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 requires showing a substantial and long-term adverse effect lasting or likely to last at least 12 months, which is difficult for an impairment that began in July 2026.

Facts behind this rating:
  • Disclosure sent regarding tachograph breaches on 8 July 2026
  • Health symptoms commenced in July 2026

Most useful action: Obtain medical records and GP notes addressing the long-term impact and prognosis of your migraines and stress condition.[14][18][19][20][23]

Process followed

2 of 4 · Needs work

You have declined an informal welfare meeting and previously refused an Occupational Health referral. To preserve your position and comply with workplace resolution standards, you should engage with company procedures and raise a formal grievance under the company policy if informal steps fail.

Facts behind this rating:
  • Declined welfare meeting on 22 September 2026 [D11]
  • Declined Occupational Health referral on 25 August 2026 [D3]
  • No formal grievance submitted under Company Grievance Procedure [D5]

Most useful action: Request an Occupational Health referral to document your health needs and submit a formal written grievance detailing detriment if informal discussions remain ineffective.[16][17][23]

Timing

3 of 4 · Reasonable

Claims under Section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and Section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 must be brought within three months of the act complained of, or the last in a series of similar acts. The latest alleged detriment occurred on 28 September 2026, meaning your limitation period currently runs to 27 December 2026.

Facts behind this rating:
  • Latest alleged incident occurred on 28 September 2026
  • Today is 4 October 2026

Most useful action: Ensure that if formal resolution fails, Acas Early Conciliation is initiated within three months less one day of each specific detrimental act.[1][11][48][64]

Urgent

  • • Ensure any future tribunal claims regarding the 14 July 2026 meeting or subsequent events are protected by initiating Acas Early Conciliation within statutory time limits running from each act or ongoing series of acts.[1][11][48][64]
  • • Respond proactively to company welfare enquiries and accept an Occupational Health assessment to formally document health conditions and obtain recommended workplace adjustments.[16][17][66]

Documents considered

  • Informal 1:1 meeting file note for J DoePerformance record · 14/07/2026
  • Statement of Written Particulars of Employment for Mr J DoeEmployment contract · 12/03/2024
  • Sickness Absence Record and Return-to-Work Declarations for J DoeMedical / fit note · 14/09/2026
  • Disciplinary Policy and Procedure for AnOtherCompany LimitedPolicy / handbook · 01/01/2024
  • Grievance Policy and Procedure for AnOtherCompany LimitedPolicy / handbook · 01/01/2024
  • Email from Sarah Jenkins regarding Kestrel Retail missed dispatch SLAsEmail chain · 24/06/2026
  • Formal service escalation email from Kestrel Retail UK LtdEmail chain · 02/07/2026
  • Email from J Doe to Sarah Jenkins regarding tachograph compliance and driver hoursEmail chain · 08/07/2026
  • Email from Sarah Jenkins regarding tachograph compliance and 1:1 meetingEmail chain · 09/07/2026
  • Email from Sarah Jenkins regarding informal welfare check-inEmail chain · 18/09/2026
  • Email from J Doe declining welfare check-in meetingEmail chain · 22/09/2026
  • Email chain regarding informal welfare check-inEmail chain · 22/09/2026
  • Email correspondence on Kestrel Retail account performance and driver hours complianceEmail chain · 09/07/2026

Known facts

  • • Mr J Doe commenced continuous employment with AnOtherCompany Limited as Operations Team Lead on 15 March 2024 at a salary of £42,500 per annum.[23]
  • • On 8 July 2026, Mr Doe sent an email to Head of Logistics Sarah Jenkins reporting that night-shift drivers were instructed to exceed statutory driving hours and tachograph limits.[18][19][20]
  • • Sarah Jenkins conducted an informal review meeting on 14 July 2026 addressing missed Kestrel Retail dispatches and operational handovers.[23]
  • • Mr Doe accumulated nine days of short-term sickness absence across three episodes in August and September 2026, triggering an informal welfare review under company policy with a Bradford Factor score of 243.[14][15]
  • • Mr Doe declined a welfare check-in meeting scheduled for 22 September 2026, citing workplace stress and micromanagement.[23]
  • • On 28 September 2026, Mr Doe returned to work and was assigned additional peer-coordinator responsibilities.[23]

Assumptions and unknowns

  • • It is assumed that the driver hours breaches reported on 8 July 2026 concerned statutory transport regulations that Mr Doe reasonably believed endangered road safety or breached legal obligations.[19][20]
  • • It is assumed that Mr Doe remains in active employment and has not been subjected to formal disciplinary warnings or dismissal.[23][64]

Detriment on Grounds of Protected Disclosure (Whistleblowing Detriment)

Contested
  • Met
    Qualifying Protected Disclosure. On 8 July 2026, you sent an email to your line manager Sarah Jenkins [] disclosing information that night-shift drivers were instructed to exceed statutory driving limits under tachograph rules to meet delivery backlogs. This conveyed factual information tending to show a breach of a legal obligation and an endangerment to health and safety, which you reasonably believed to be in the public interest under Section 43B(1)(b) and (d) and disclosed internally to your employer under Section 43C of the Employment Rights Act 1996.[18][19][20]
  • Met
    Subjected to Detriment. Following your disclosure, you experienced heightened scrutiny, criticism during the 14 July 2026 meeting [], an insistence on attendance at a welfare meeting on 22 September 2026 [], and an unagreed allocation of additional peer-coordinator duties upon your return on 28 September 2026. Under Section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996, treatment that places a worker at a disadvantage in the workplace constitutes a detriment.[23]
  • Unclear
    Causation (Detriment on the ground of the disclosure). Under Section 48(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, the employer must show the ground on which any act was done. While the timing of the criticism on 14 July 2026 closely followed your email of 8 July 2026 [], the employer possesses documentary evidence showing pre-existing performance concerns and client SLA escalations raised on 24 June 2026 [] and 2 July 2026 [], before your disclosure was made.[23][64]

The other side will say…

• AnOtherCompany Limited will argue that the informal review on 14 July 2026 [] and subsequent monitoring were genuine, non-disciplinary operational responses to client escalations from Kestrel Retail on 24 June 2026 [] and 2 July 2026 [] regarding missed 07:00 delivery windows.[23][64]

• The employer will contend that the welfare check-in scheduled for 22 September 2026 [] was an automatic requirement triggered by your Bradford Factor score reaching 243 following three separate absences [], in line with Section 7.4 of the Company Handbook.[23][64]

Things that would make this worse

• If the employer proves that performance monitoring and the welfare invitation would have occurred regardless of the 8 July 2026 disclosure due to client SLA defaults, the causation link under Section 47B will fail.[23][64]

Health and Safety Detriment

Contested
  • Met
    Raising Health and Safety Concerns by Reasonable Means. In the absence of a designated safety committee or representative, you brought to your employer's attention on 8 July 2026 [] circumstances connected with your work regarding driver fatigue and road safety hazards which you reasonably believed were harmful to health or safety, satisfying Section 44(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.[63]
  • Unclear
    Detrimental Treatment on Health and Safety Grounds. Although you were subjected to increased workload pressure and management scrutiny, the employer bears the burden under Section 48(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 to prove the reason for the treatment, and they rely on documented pre-existing service failures dating from June 2026 [].[63][64]

The other side will say…

• The respondent will assert that all management actions were directed solely at addressing operational bottlenecks on the Kestrel Retail contract and managing sickness absence under established procedures [, ].[63][64]

Things that would make this worse

• If the tribunal accepts that the sole motive for managerial contact was SLA recovery and standard sickness management, the claim under Section 44 will not succeed.[63][64]

Disability Discrimination: Failure to Make Reasonable Adjustments and Unfavourable Treatment

Weak
  • Unclear
    Statutory Disability Status. Under Section 6(1) of the Equality Act 2010, a disability requires a physical or mental impairment having a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities, where long-term means lasting or likely to last at least 12 months. Your symptoms of stress and migraines began in July 2026, meaning they have persisted for less than 3 months to date.[3][14]
  • Unclear
    Employer Knowledge of Disability. While your self-certification forms between 1 August and 15 September 2026 recorded stress and migraines [], you declined an Occupational Health referral during the return-to-work interview on 25 August 2026 [], which weakens the argument that the employer had constructive or actual knowledge of a qualifying long-term impairment under Section 15(2) and Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010.[14][15][16][70]
  • Not met
    Breach of Duty to Adjust / Unfavourable Treatment. The duty to make reasonable adjustments under Section 20 and the prohibition of unfavourable treatment under Section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 apply only if statutory disability is established. Furthermore, the return-to-work record [] shows you did not request adjustments on 10 August 2026 and declined the Occupational Health pathway on 25 August 2026.[15][16][17][70][71]

The other side will say…

• AnOtherCompany Limited will contend that your condition is a transient reaction to workplace stress rather than a statutory disability under Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010, and that they sought to support your welfare by inviting you to a review [] which you refused [].[14][15][16]

Things that would make this worse

• Without independent medical evidence establishing that your stress and migraines are likely to last for 12 months or recur long term, any Equality Act claims cannot proceed past preliminary stages.[14][69]

What helps

  • • Your email of 8 July 2026 [] provides unambiguous, contemporaneous documentary evidence of raising statutory driver hours and tachograph breaches directly to your manager Sarah Jenkins, satisfying Section 43B and Section 43C of the Employment Rights Act 1996.[18][19][20]
  • • The file note of 14 July 2026 [] explicitly confirms that management altered rosters and engaged relief drivers following your 8 July 2026 email, demonstrating employer awareness of the safety issue you raised.[19][20]
  • • You have over 2 years of continuous service since 15 March 2024 [], ensuring full statutory protection in respect of employment rights.[23][64]

What hurts

  • • Written records from Sarah Jenkins on 24 June 2026 [] and Kestrel Retail UK Ltd on 2 July 2026 [] establish that serious SLA performance shortfalls and escalation warnings occurred before your protected disclosure on 8 July 2026 [].[23][64]
  • • Your sickness absence record [] indicates that you declined an Occupational Health referral on 25 August 2026 and requested no adjustments on 10 August 2026, which contradicts your initial assertion that the employer simply refused support.[15][16][70]
  • • The invitation to an informal welfare check-in on 18 September 2026 [] followed an objective Bradford Factor trigger score of 243 under Section 7.4 of the Company Handbook [], providing the employer with a credible, non-retaliatory rationale for the meeting.[23][64]

What is missing

  • • Full text and email headers of the 18 September 2026 welfare check-in invitation from Sarah Jenkins [].[23][64]
  • • Full text and transmission details of your email sent on the morning of 22 September 2026 declining the welfare check-in meeting [].[23][64]
  • • Full text and thread of the 22 September 2026 email exchange between Sarah Jenkins, HR, and yourself [].[23][64]
  • • Complete copy of the 9 July 2026 email from Sarah Jenkins regarding tachograph compliance and the 1:1 meeting [, ].[19][23]
  • • Written records, job descriptions, or manager instructions from 28 September 2026 concerning the requirement to perform extra peer-coordinator tasks.[23][64]
  • • GP medical records, consultation notes, or specialist medical reports regarding your migraine condition and stress prognosis.[14]

Procedure to follow, step by step

  • • Step 8: Acas Early Conciliation. If internal procedures fail to resolve the dispute, the employee must contact Acas to commence mandatory Early Conciliation under Section 18A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 before lodging any Employment Tribunal claim under Section 48 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 or Section 120 of the Equality Act 2010.[1][2][48][64]

Options and trade-offs

  • • Option 1: Pursue internal workplace resolution while remaining employed. Submit a formal grievance under the company Grievance Policy [] and request an Occupational Health referral alongside a stress risk assessment under Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 to adjust workload and duties.[65][66]
  • • Option 2: Seek mediated conciliation and formal adjustment. Engage HR to establish clear written role boundaries under Section 4 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, address the 8 July 2026 compliance disclosure [], and agree on structured support without escalating to external litigation.[23][33]
  • • Option 3: Initiate Acas Early Conciliation for statutory detriment claims. If the employer refuses to address the detrimental treatment following your protected disclosure [] or fails to provide a fair internal hearing, notify Acas to explore conciliation under Section 18A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996.[1][2][19][23][64]
  • • Option 4: Explore confidential settlement negotiations. If the working relationship has broken down irretrievably despite the objective to stay, negotiate a binding settlement agreement under Section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 with independent legal advice.[43]

Deadlines

  • • Whistleblowing detriment tribunal claim: Under Section 48(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, a complaint must be presented to an Employment Tribunal within 3 months starting from the date of the act or deliberate failure to act, or the last in a series of similar acts.[64]
  • • Equality Act discrimination claim: Under Section 123(1) of the Equality Act 2010, proceedings must be brought within 3 months starting with the date of the act complained of, subject to extension for Acas Early Conciliation.[1][11]
  • • Acas Early Conciliation limitation pause: Notifying Acas under Section 18A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 pauses the limitation clock for a conciliation period of up to 12 weeks under the 2025 regulations.[1][2]

Prioritised next steps

  • • Prepare and submit a formal written grievance to the HR Manager setting out the timeline of your 8 July 2026 safety disclosure [], the subsequent performance scrutiny [], and the recent allocation of out of scope peer coordinator duties on 28 September 2026 in accordance with the company Grievance Policy [].[19][20][23]
  • • Formally request an Occupational Health assessment and an individual workplace stress risk assessment under Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 to evaluate the impact of workload pressures on your migraine and stress symptoms.[65][66]
  • • Maintain a continuous, contemporaneous written record of all daily interactions, shift allocations, meeting requests, and health impacts, cross-referencing all duties against your written statement of particulars [].[33]

Questions that could change this view

  • • Has HR or Sarah Jenkins issued any formal response or outcome following your 22 September 2026 email declining the welfare check-in [, ]?
  • • Do you possess written documentation, such as task handover emails or roster sheets, confirming the specific peer coordinator duties assigned to you on 28 September 2026?[33]
  • • Have you obtained a medical report or fit note from your GP detailing the anticipated duration, clinical prognosis, and recommended workplace adjustments for your stress and migraines?[14][16]

Sources

[1] EC_MANDATORY[2] EC_MAX_PERIOD[3] EqA 2010 s.4[11] EqA 2010 s.123[14] EqA 2010 s.6[15] EqA 2010 s.15[16] EqA 2010 s.20[17] EqA 2010 s.21[18] ERA 1996 s.43A[19] ERA 1996 s.43B[20] ERA 1996 s.43C[23] ERA 1996 s.47B[33] ERA 1996 s.4[43] ERA 1996 s.203[63] ERA 1996 s.44[64] ERA 1996 s.48[48] ETA 1996 s.18[65] MHSWR 1999 reg.3[66] HSWA 1974 s.2[68] EHRC Emp Code – Burden of proof Burden of proof[69] EHRC Emp Code – Restrictions on protection under the Act Restrictions on protection under the Act[70] EHRC Emp Code – How does it differ from indirect discrimination? How does it differ from indirect discrimination?[71] EHRC Emp Code – When can discrimination arising from disability be justified? When can discrimination arising from disability be justified?

Every point was checked against its source; 9 points that could not be supported were removed. Strength is an estimate, never a promise.

HeartBrain Resolve provides dispute analysis and procedural guidance based on UK employment law and your documents. It is not legal advice from a solicitor, and using it does not create a solicitor-client relationship. For formal representation, contact Acas or one of our vetted partner solicitors.

Explore the full assessment

When you want advice too

From analysis to advice, without starting over.

When your assessment is ready, you can share it, inside HeartBrain, with a partner employment lawyer. They see a frozen copy of the exact report you see, and you stay in control. You can remove their access at any time.

Share in one click

Send your report to a HeartBrain partner employment lawyer from inside the app.

Frozen copy, never edited

The lawyer sees exactly the report you see, saved as a fixed snapshot.

Revoke any time

Remove a lawyer's access whenever you want.

Choose when you are ready

One clear price. No subscription.

One workplace dispute

Single Matter Pass

£27.99 one-off

One case, 10 report updates, 10 questions and permanent report access.

If you later need more on the same case, a £10 top-up adds 3 updates and 10 questions and does not expire.

Trust and boundaries

Rigorous about what it can and cannot say.

Official sources

Every legal point is checked against official UK sources, such as GOV.UK and Acas.

Your evidence

All your uploaded evidence documents are fully incorporated into the assessment.

Unsupported points removed

If a point cannot be backed up with existing UK law, it is removed from your assessment report.

HeartBrain Resolve provides dispute analysis and legal information, not regulated legal advice. Northern Ireland is not currently covered. Where regulated advice is needed, you can share a frozen copy of your report with a partner employment lawyer inside HeartBrain. If time is short, Acas is there today.

Join HeartBrain free. Pay only when you want Resolve to analyse your own situation.

Create my free HeartBrain accountComing soonSign in
Explore Resolve for organisations