FOR THE v Respondent — 2021

At a remote preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Povey sitting alone, the tribunal dealt with amendment, timeliness, disability status, and case management issues. The Claimant’s application to amend her bullying complaints into race discrimination was refused, and the tribunal struck out the bullying claims because it had no jurisdiction to determine bullying alone. The respondent’s applications for strike out and a deposit order were dismissed.

The direct sex discrimination claims, which related to the unsuccessful September 2017 IT Support Technician application and the April 2019 Mechatronics Maintenance Apprentice application, were held to be out of time and not within a period that was just and equitable under section 123 EqA 2010. The tribunal found that the Claimant knew soon after each recruitment exercise that she believed sex had played a part, that she had pursued an internal grievance which was not upheld on 10 May 2019, and that she still did not begin tribunal proceedings until after ACAS early conciliation in August 2020. Those claims were struck out.

The direct disability discrimination complaint based on the September 2018 warning letter / letter of concern was also struck out as out of time and not just and equitable. On disability status, the tribunal found that the Claimant was disabled by reason of Type 2 diabetes, hepatitis B & E, and pancreatitis from 10 March 2019, but not by her other diagnosed conditions on the evidence presented. The reasonable adjustment complaints were split: the PCP alleging that the Respondent ignored her statement about disability was out of time and struck out, but the complaints about requests for accommodation, questions about accommodation, and reduced working hours because of health issues were held to be in time from 10 March 2019 and were listed for further case management, with no merits decision yet made.