That case is more about having to have a procedure.
Here you go, from CIPD website
DG07: Which communications should an employer treat as a grievance?
Any communication which contains a problem or complaint that the employees raises with their employer should potentially be treated as a grievance. If an employer is in doubt about whether the employee is raising a formal grievance, that issue could always be clarified with the employee by asking them directly.
The key points which employers should note concerning grievances arising from previous case law are:
?Grievances can be contained in a wide variety of written communications, for example, a letter making a general moan or grumble, emails, resignation letters, in a letter from the employee?s solicitor (even if a letter threatening proceedings) and a flexible working request.
?If a grievance does not mention the legal basis of the claim at all, the employer may have a chance of having a subsequent claim barred, at least temporarily.
?Employees do not need to set out a detailed statement of grievance, but there must be sufficient for the employer to appreciate that a relevant grievance has being raised.
?Employers should scrutinise an employee?s ET1 claim form to determine the nature of the complaint and compare it to the grievance.
Case law examples
The following are examples of the numerous cases under the statutory procedures which clarify whether the employee has intiated the grievance procedure:
?Commotion Ltd v Rutty [2006] IRLR 171, EAT. In this case, it was held that a written request for flexible working under the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 80F can count as a grievance letter even though there was no specific reference to a grievance as such.
?Martin v Class Security Installations Limited (unreported EAT/0188/06/DM). The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that a resignation letter and a solicitor?s letter were both sufficient to constitute a grievance letter even although the solicitor's letter implied that a grievance would follow in due course.
?Shergold v Fieldway Medical Centre [2006] IRLR 76. It was held that a resignation letter was sufficient to initiate the statutory grievance process as long as the 'grievance' is set out in writing. The tribunal commented that it is not necessary to state that a letter is a grievance, or is an invocation of a grievance procedure. It was also stated that the grievance need not be identical to subsequent proceedings, but there must be material similarity if the statutory procedures are to be complied with.
Basically if it might be a grievance, it should be treated as one. So in the OPs case, her employer clearly know it is a grievance, otherwise they wouldn't feel the need to point out that she hasn't technically followed the procedure, so they should treat it as one not dismiss it out of hand for a techicality.