Miss Karissa Govender v Miriam Kelele-Nuvi and 3 others — 2023

Miss Govender worked as a non-registered vaccinator supplied by Bank Partners to UCLH. The tribunal accepted that she was disabled within the Equality Act 2010 and that all four respondents had knowledge of that disability at the relevant times. It also found that the February 2022 incident in which she shouted on the shop floor could reasonably be viewed as at least partly a manifestation of her borderline personality disorder.

Following the claimant’s arrest on 8 August 2022 and release on 9 August, the tribunal found that the first respondent spoke to her in a three-way call with the third respondent, that the claimant was distressed and said she wanted urgent psychiatric help and medication, and that it was agreed she would not work on 10 August. On 12 August the first respondent sent her home from the shift; the tribunal found this was unfavourable treatment arising from emotional instability but held it was a proportionate response to legitimate aims of keeping staff, patients and the public safe, protecting the claimant’s wellbeing, delivering safe care and complying with the National Protocols.

The tribunal found the second respondent upheld that decision after the claimant escalated the matter, and reached the same conclusion on justification. It found the third respondent’s 11 August emails about medication and returning to work were not unfavourable treatment because she was acting as a friend and following the claimant’s own earlier comments; alternatively, they were justified on the same safety and wellbeing grounds. As to the fourth respondent, the tribunal found she did start the risk assessment process and did not fail to take the informal complaint seriously; the delay was explained by workload, annual leave and the fact that Occupational Health referral was BP’s responsibility. The harassment claim failed because the agreed discussions were not unwanted conduct, the sending-home decision did not meet the harassment threshold, and the conduct did not violate dignity or create a hostile environment.