Mrs L Wilson (Wife of Claimant) For the v Respondent — 2019

Mr Wilson worked for H B Clark & Co (Successors) Ltd as a warehouse operative from 28 September 1989, having moved from a driver role in 2015. After back surgery in December 2017, he returned on reduced hours and light duties, and the tribunal recorded a series of occupational health reports and welfare meetings through 2018. The tribunal accepted that he was disabled within the meaning of section 6 Equality Act 2010 and that the respondent explored adjustments, including half-days, lighter duties in the Crisp room, and alternative work options.

On the section 15 Equality Act 2010 claim, the tribunal accepted that the dismissal was unfavourable treatment because of something arising in consequence of disability, but held that the respondent had shown it was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, described as sound business reasons. It found that by the end of 2018 the claimant could no longer do about half of his warehouse duties, that his light-duty arrangement had become unsustainable from the respondent's point of view, and that the timing and outcome of the further operation did not give the respondent a reasonable basis to wait.

On the reasonable adjustments claim, the tribunal held it would not have been reasonable to require the respondent to keep the claimant on the light duties he was doing or to postpone a decision about his employment pending surgery. It said the duties had become uneconomical for the business and that the outcome of the operation was unknown. On unfair dismissal, the reason for dismissal was capability, and the tribunal applied section 98(4) Employment Rights Act 1996. It found the respondent had acted reasonably in the circumstances, taking into account the meetings, attempts to accommodate the claimant, the later involvement of Mrs Cattanach, and the appeal process, and it therefore dismissed all claims.