In person For the v Respondent — 2019

The tribunal first dealt with respondent identity and employment status. It said it could not identify a single correct employing entity from the documents, noted several companies in the Priory and Craegmoor group structure as possible respondents, and added further respondents by separate order. It accepted that the claimant had moved from employee to bank worker in January 2014 under an agreement stating that the work was not a contract of employment and that shifts could be accepted or declined.

On status, the tribunal applied Ready Mixed Concrete and found no mutuality of obligation. The respondent was not obliged to offer hours and the claimant was not obliged to accept them, even though she sometimes felt moral pressure to cover shifts. On that basis the claimant was found not to be an employee, and the unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

On disability, the tribunal treated plantar fasciitis separately from the arm conditions it grouped as the Arm Impairment, namely carpal tunnel syndrome, fibromyalgia and myofascial pain. It rejected the submission that a medically diagnosed cause had to be shown, found no substantial or long-term adverse effect from plantar fasciitis, but found that the Arm Impairment had become long-term by 19 November 2015 and caused a substantial adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities from that date to 21 January 2019. It therefore found that the claimant had a disability for Equality Act purposes during that period.