Ms L Dunn v Utilta Telesales Ltd. — 2021

Ms Dunn was employed as a telesales agent from 5 August 2019 and the tribunal accepted that she was disabled and suffered from complex post-traumatic stress disorder. Danielle Wynter was her manager. The tribunal found from the documents and oral evidence that the two had a close and largely supportive working relationship, including repeated text and email exchanges in which the claimant thanked Ms Wynter for support. Ms Dunn was appointed Campaign Manager with effect from 9 December 2019 on a six-month secondment/probationary arrangement, and on 19 February 2020 she stepped back to telesales.

The direct disability discrimination allegations were dismissed. The tribunal did not accept the claimant's account of the 3 December 2019 welfare discussion, the alleged questioning after the Christmas party, the January 2020 apology issue, or the allegation that she was forced to leave the Campaign Manager role. It found no less favourable treatment, no evidence that the claimant was treated differently from the cited comparators, and no basis for concluding that any treatment was because of disability.

The reasonable adjustments claim was also dismissed. The tribunal found no identified PCP and held that the claimant had been successful in the telesales role without adjustments. It accepted the respondent's evidence that the requested steps, including occupational health input, referral to a psychologist, and a formal welfare meeting, were not shown to be necessary on the facts, particularly because the claimant did not want that process and was able to make her own choices.

The harassment and victimisation claims failed for similar reasons. The tribunal did not accept that the pleaded harassment incidents occurred as alleged or that any conduct related to disability. It also found that the claimant had not done a protected act in relation to the sexist remark made by another employee, because she did not raise it with Danielle Wynter, and it held that the suggestion that she speak to the other manager was not a detriment.

The constructive unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal held that the respondent's post-sickness correspondence and capability process were directed to support and return-to-work planning under its sickness absence policy, not conduct calculated or likely to destroy trust and confidence. It noted that in May 2020 the parties agreed a home-working and phased return arrangement, and it rejected the argument that later emails, the occupational health report, or the June and July 2020 capability correspondence amounted to a final straw. Ms Dunn resigned on 29 October 2020, but the tribunal found no repudiatory breach and no constructive dismissal. No monetary award was made.