Stephen Jones v Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) — 2021

The claimant, who is paraplegic and uses a wheelchair, was offered a Vehicle Standards Assessor role. The offer was withdrawn after the respondent considered whether he could safely perform duties involving inspection of heavy goods vehicles at third-party authorised testing facilities, including access to inspection pits and vehicle cabs. The tribunal found that the respondent's process had flaws, particularly the failure to consult the claimant about possible adjustments, but accepted that those involved genuinely believed reasonable adjustments could not be made.

The direct disability discrimination claim failed because the tribunal found that a non-disabled hypothetical comparator with the same inability to enter or leave pits and cabs without auxiliary aid or lifting assistance would have been treated in the same way. The harassment claims failed because the tribunal either did not find the alleged words proved, or found that the emails, withdrawal of the offer, and grievance outcome did not reasonably amount to harassment in context.

The reasonable adjustments claim failed. The tribunal considered proposed adjustments including a support worker or video, working only at ATFs with a hoist or mobile column lift, installing hoists or lifts, Access to Work, external experts, occupational health recommendations, and an alternative role. It found that the proposed steps either would not avoid the relevant disadvantage, were not shown to be reasonable or effective on the evidence, or had in substance been done, as with the alternative role. The s.15 claim also failed because the tribunal found no less discriminatory way to achieve the accepted legitimate aim of meeting business needs and standards and ensuring the VSA role was performed safely.