Mr M Riley v DL Insurance Services Limited — 2019

The claimant was accepted to be disabled by reason of Autistic Spectrum Disorder and Mixed Anxiety and Moderate Depression. He had been absent for a lengthy period and returned to work on a phased basis for 14 working days between 3 April and 21 May 2018, after which he was assessed as unfit for work. The tribunal found that the respondent had made a number of adjustments to support the return to work, but that agreed Access to Work recommendations for training and suitable headset equipment had not been put in place in a timely manner.

The tribunal found that the termination of employment on 19 September 2018 was an agreed mutual termination rather than a dismissal. It relied on the contemporaneous meeting notes and emails, finding that the claimant understood the pay direct arrangement with UNUM, asked questions about matters such as payment continuity, duration of benefit and shares, and agreed to the termination so that he could receive direct payments under the PHI policy. Because there was no dismissal, the unfair dismissal, direct disability discrimination by dismissal, and discrimination arising from disability by dismissal complaints failed.

For the reasonable adjustments complaint, the tribunal found that the duty was engaged while the claimant was undertaking live calls and that the respondent failed to provide agreed training and headset adjustments by the time they should reasonably have been in place. However, the last relevant working day was 21 May 2018, and after that the claimant was unfit for any work. The complaint was presented out of time, and the tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time, so the reasonable adjustments complaint was dismissed.