Lisa Traynor v Elim Foursquare Gospel Alliance (a charity) — 2021

Lisa Traynor was employed as administrator at the Plymouth Christian Centre nursery and was dismissed shortly before completing two years' service. The tribunal accepted that the respondent knew of her older son's disability, and that the claim was one of associative disability discrimination. It also accepted that the claim was presented about three weeks late, but held that it was just and equitable to extend time because of the Covid-19 period and delay with legal advice.

On the merits, the tribunal found that the respondent's concerns about the claimant's performance were genuine and long-standing. It accepted that she needed substantial support with administration, organisation and IT, that she was frequently late, and that there were repeated issues with tasks, accounts, filing and the DK accounting system. The tribunal found that the limited request made in early 2019, that appointments if possible be arranged outside working hours, was reasonable, that the claimant was allowed to attend the appointments she wished, and that there was no sanction or requirement to seek permission.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's case that the dismissal was tainted by disability discrimination. It held that the dismissal arose from genuine performance concerns and then a breakdown in the working relationship after the October and November 2019 meetings, followed by the grievance process and the conclusion that there was no workable way for the claimant to continue working with her manager alone. The tribunal found no facts from which discrimination could properly be inferred, and said that the son's disability was only background context rather than the reason for dismissal.

The harassment allegations were also dismissed. The tribunal found that the alleged attendance comments, the CAMHS letter incident, the EastEnders and empathy remarks, the suggestion that she might leave, the alleged instruction to reduce appointments, the change in working days, the alleged overloading of her role, the performance email, the meeting conduct, the grievance handling, the post-dismissal contact instructions and the staff letter and notice-board incidents were either not made out, or were not related to the son's disability, or were not capable of amounting to harassment. It concluded that there was no unlawful disability-related harassment and no award of compensation was made.