Ms F Hagi v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2021

The Claimant was a current employee of Royal Mail Group Limited and was disabled by reason of schizophrenia and a bowel condition. The tribunal considered disability-related harassment, direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability and reasonable adjustments claims arising from workplace incidents, grievance investigations and absence management.

Two harassment allegations succeeded. The tribunal found that Ian Milne's conduct in moving towards the Claimant's bag on 10 December 2020 was unwanted conduct related to disability and had the effect of violating her dignity. It also found that Patrick Herel's conduct on 14 January 2022, when he went to a disabled person's toilet to confront the person inside about alleged urination on the floor, was unwanted conduct related to disability and had the effect of violating the Claimant's dignity. Other harassment allegations were dismissed because the tribunal did not find the necessary relationship with disability or the alleged conduct as pleaded.

The direct disability discrimination claims were dismissed. The tribunal criticised some aspects of how complaints were handled, particularly aspects of Mr Potter's and Mr Palmer's approach, but did not find that the relevant treatment was because of disability. The tribunal also dismissed or did not separately determine the discrimination arising from disability allegations about workload and complaint handling, but the claim about placing the Claimant on the second stage of the absence management/capability procedure succeeded because liability was conceded.

Both reasonable adjustments claims succeeded. The first, concerning the requirement not to keep personal belongings on the operational floor despite the Claimant's need for quick access to disability-related items, was conceded. The second succeeded because the tribunal found that the five working day response period in the bullying and harassment process put the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage, that Mr Potter had or should have had the relevant knowledge, and that allowing a few extra days would have been a reasonable adjustment. The tribunal extended time for the out-of-time successful claims on a just and equitable basis.