Dr A Schaeffer v University of Manchester — 2024

The Tribunal accepted that Dr Schaeffer was disabled by autistic spectrum disorder and found that the University had knowledge of that disability from 9 June 2021. It did not accept that the University had knowledge before that date. The claims concerned marking deadlines, leave and online teaching in September 2021, the requirement to attend Occupational Health before returning to work, the absence of an independent arbitrator, and the claimant being treated as on sick leave.

For the section 15 claim, the Tribunal found that some alleged treatment did not happen as alleged, including a refusal of extra time for marking and any threat of dismissal. It found that the leave and teaching issues arose from childcare arrangements rather than something arising in consequence of disability. It also found that requiring Occupational Health assessment after a period of sickness absence and emails raising concerns about mental health was not unfavourable treatment; alternatively, it was a proportionate means of achieving the University's legitimate aim of protecting students, staff and the claimant and assessing fitness to work.

For the reasonable adjustments claim, the Tribunal accepted some PCPs existed, including marking deadlines, face-to-face teaching expectations, the Occupational Health requirement, and the need to give reasons for absence. However, it found insufficient medical evidence that those PCPs placed Dr Schaeffer at the substantial disadvantages alleged by reason of ASD. It also found that several proposed adjustments were either not requested of the employer, were connected to childcare rather than disability, or were not reasonable in the circumstances, particularly returning to work without Occupational Health assessment.