Mrs M Matthews v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust — 2020

The claimant was employed as a radiographer and was dismissed during a period of ill-health absence. The tribunal found that she was disabled by reason of anxiety and depression from 24 August 2018 and that the respondent had knowledge of disability from that date. It did not accept that she had established disability from September 2018 on the basis of symptoms said to have been substantial from September 2017.

The reasonable adjustment complaints were dismissed. The tribunal found that the pleaded PCP about self-taught training for promotion from band 5 to band 6 was not applied as alleged, and that the senior development programme was neither necessary nor sufficient for promotion. It also found that the requirement for band 5 radiographers to work across multiple sites did not place the claimant at the substantial disadvantage alleged. The tribunal accepted that attendance requirements placed her at a substantial disadvantage, but found that the proposed adjustments, including deferring dismissal, restoring band 6 pay, creating a bespoke grievance review procedure, offering a phased return, or providing a buddy at the dismissal point, were not reasonable or would not have enabled a return to work.

The dismissal was found to be unfavourable treatment arising from disability-related sickness absence, but the tribunal held that dismissal was a proportionate means of achieving the respondent's legitimate aim of maintaining efficiency and effectiveness through reasonable attendance. For unfair dismissal, the tribunal found the reason was capability, that the respondent had consulted the claimant, considered occupational health advice and possible adjustments, and that there was no evidence of a likely return to work or suitable alternative employment.

The breach of contract and unauthorised deductions complaints failed. The tribunal found that the claimant was offered the choice of remaining in the band 6 PACS role or working in a band 5 general radiography role, that the respondent had made clear the general radiography role would be paid at band 5, and that by working in that role the claimant accepted the role on that pay basis.