Mr N Wakeman v Atkins Limited — 2022

The claimant worked as a Principal Engineer from December 2015. The respondent accepted that he was disabled from 15 April 2019 following a stroke, and the tribunal found that the respondent ought reasonably to have known of that disability from 18 April 2019. After raising grievances about stress, exclusion, communication, the use of the phrase 'gold plated', the H2H project, the MyQSSE report, pay and promotion matters, and grievance handling, the claimant resigned with immediate effect on 17 February 2020 after the grievance appeal outcome.

The constructive dismissal claim failed. The tribunal found that the claimant was not subjected to an excessive workload or an expectation to work onerous hours, and that his own detailed approach to design work meant he often spent longer on projects than the respondent expected. It found no prolonged exclusion from workstreams, no culture of blame, no failure to carry out a stress risk assessment, and no unfairness in the appointment of Kai Liaw as lead civil and structural engineer. The tribunal also found that the phrase 'gold plated' was critical of the claimant's design style and caused some reputational damage, but it was not conduct calculated or likely to destroy trust and confidence. The grievance process and its appeal were investigated thoroughly, and the claimant resigned before the recommendations could be implemented.

All disability discrimination claims failed. For direct discrimination, the tribunal found no less favourable treatment because of disability. For discrimination arising from disability, it accepted that the claimant's increased susceptibility to stress arose from his stroke, but found no facts showing that the MyQSSE handling was because of that susceptibility; it also found that the respondent had a non-discriminatory explanation and a proportionate aim in taking the report offline because of its personal nature. The reasonable adjustments claim failed because several pleaded PCPs were not established and the MyQSSE issue did not amount to more than a minor or trivial disadvantage. The harassment claim failed because the proved conduct did not meet the statutory test.

The breach of contract claim, based on references sought for appraisal purposes, failed because the tribunal did not accept that the claimant had shown a contractual term that was breached. The claim for unlawful deductions from wages was taken to be withdrawn. All claims were dismissed.