Senior Executive Settlement Agreement in a Difficult Workplace Dispute Case

When this client came to us, he was a senior executive in a large international business and had given the company around nine years of service. He held a global leadership role, managed a team of 25 people and had helped build an important client onboarding function within the business. His responsibilities had grown significantly over time, and he had a strong track record with no warnings or performance concerns raised against him.

Experiencing a situation similar to this?
Get in touch with Settlement Agreement Advice today.

The Problem

Senior-Level Accountability Without the Authority to Succeed

The situation became serious when he was told, verbally rather than in writing, that he would be accountable for a very substantial onboarding revenue/P&L portfolio. The matter papers describe that portfolio as being around 80 million, while also showing that most of the delivery sat outside his direct management control. In practice, he was being exposed to major commercial responsibility without the reporting lines, authority, structure, title or pay needed to manage that risk properly.

That was not the only issue. His manager had already put forward a formal written case for elevating his role and giving him the authority needed to deliver, but those proposals were not implemented. At the same time, he was excluded from parts of an internal restructuring process affecting his function, and he had raised concerns about recruitment decisions for senior roles that should have sat within his area.

This was not a straightforward redundancy matter. It was a senior workplace dispute involving alleged unilateral changes to role and accountability, concerns about trust and confidence, and protected disclosure/whistleblowing detriment issues linked to recruitment and internal decision-making.

Navigate This Case Study:

How We Advised

How We Negotiated Better Terms

The Settlement We Secured

The Value We Added

Why That Mattered to the Client

The Outcome

How We Advised

We reviewed the background documents carefully and advised the client on the complaints identified in our correspondence, including unilateral variation of contract, breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, potential constructive unfair dismissal, procedural unfairness and protected disclosure detriment. We also considered the practical realities.

The employer denied liability and disputed key parts of the client’s account. In its written response, it said he had not been given personal P&L accountability, denied that he had been unfairly excluded from relevant processes, and rejected the suggestion that there had been unfair grade disparity. That meant this was not a case where anyone should assume an easy or stress-free path through Employment Tribunal litigation. Our role was therefore not only to identify the strengths of the client’s position, but also to use those strengths to pursue the best available commercial outcome.

In our without prejudice proposal, we set out the factual background, identified the claims and quantified the potential value of the case for negotiation purposes at £161,800, including a basic award, compensatory award and injury to feelings element.

How We Negotiated Better Terms

We then opened settlement negotiations with a view to avoiding the cost, delay and strain of tribunal proceedings. Our initial proposal sought garden leave, salary and benefits to termination, notice pay, accrued holiday pay, a £42,770 ex gratia payment, payment for unvested RSU awards, a pro-rated bonus, an agreed reference, mutual confidentiality/ non-derogatory provisions and a contribution towards legal fees.

The employer’s earlier written offer fell short of that. Among other things, it offered an ex gratia payment of £28,510, refused any payment for unvested awards, and refused any annual bonus payment. Later, when the employer described three months’ notice pay as its final position, we challenged that directly by reference to the contractual notice wording and pressed for a higher notice payment. The client specifically raised that the contract entitled him to more than three months’ notice by reason of his length of service, and we pursued that point in the negotiations.

That made a real difference.

The Settlement We Secured

The final settlement agreement provided for:

Salary and benefits up to termination
Garden leave through to termination
£57,030 as post-employment notice pay, representing four months’ salary
£7,240 for accrued but unused holiday
£42,770 as an ex gratia compensation payment, inclusive of any statutory redundancy payment, with the first £30,000 to be paid without deduction of income tax or National Insurance
A contribution of £2,500 plus VAT towards legal fees
An agreed reference
Confidentiality provisions and protections against derogatory/disparaging statements.

The Value We Added

The improvement in terms was tangible.

First, the ex gratia compensation increased from the employer’s earlier written offer of £28,510 to £42,770, an uplift of £14,260.

Secondly, when the employer later tried to hold the line at three months’ notice pay, we challenged that position and the final agreement recorded four months’ salary as notice pay, totalling £57,030. That equates to an extra month of salary of about £14,260 over the employer’s later three-month position.

We also secured clarity on holiday pay, an agreed reference, garden leave, and a legal fees contribution, all of which mattered in practical terms as much as the headline compensation figure.

Why That Mattered to the Client

For this client, the benefit was not just financial. The final package gave him certainty, an agreed exit route, an agreed reference for future employers, and a clean end to an increasingly stressful situation. Our advice to him was that the agreed sums were reasonable in the circumstances, and after we took him through the agreement and answered his questions, he confirmed that he was happy to proceed, subject to a minor amendment to the reference wording.

Just as importantly, settlement avoided the cost, uncertainty and emotional strain of pursuing formal Employment Tribunal proceedings. Our earlier correspondence had expressly identified settlement as a preferable route if sensible terms could be achieved, and the client was content to conclude matters without further delay once those improved terms had been secured.

The Outcome

This case shows the value of taking legal advice early when a senior employee is facing a major change in responsibilities, a breakdown in trust or the prospect of leaving under pressure. Here, careful advice and firm negotiation turned a highly difficult workplace situation into a defined and improved settlement package.

We were able to help the client move on with:

A substantial financial package
Improved notice terms
Agreed compensation
Payment for accrued holiday
Legal fees covered up to £2,500 plus VAT
An agreed reference
The certainty of a binding settlement agreement instead of contested tribunal litigation.

In short, we helped the client secure a materially better exit than the employer’s earlier position, while bringing a stressful dispute to a prompt and practical conclusion.