Mrs J Grayson First v South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Second Respondent: Paul Harrison — 2024

The claimant was a band 6 nurse in the Chemotherapy Day Unit at James Cook University Hospital. She brought claims for failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination arising from disability and disability-related harassment. The tribunal accepted that she had a disability, on the respondents' concession for the period April 2021 to December 2022, but held that allegations before 30 June 2022 were out of time and should only be treated as background. It also rejected the argument that there was conduct extending over a period for limitation purposes.

On the reasonable adjustments claim, the tribunal accepted the claimant's case that the respondent applied PCPs requiring her to do the substantive band 6 role, work in the chemotherapy day unit and comply with sickness absence indicators. It found, however, that the respondent allowed and encouraged regular breaks, provided stools to reduce bending and stooping, enabled coordinator work and other alternative duties such as pre-assessment, QMS audit and infection control training, and redeployed her to the oncology outpatients department for 12 weeks on return to work. It held that the respondent struck a reasonable balance between the claimant's needs, staffing requirements and patient care, and had done all that it reasonably could.

The tribunal dealt with the claimant's complaint under section 15 by accepting that her inability to carry out the full range of band 6 duties arose from disability. It found that Mrs Harrison's discussion with the claimant on 29 June 2022 and the follow-up email on 30 June 2022, which referred to alternative roles within the hospital, were a sensible response to the claimant's stated difficulty in the day unit and her wish for a less physically demanding job. The tribunal held that this was not unfavourable treatment. It said that, had it been wrong about that, the respondent would have been able to show a legitimate aim and proportionality.

On harassment, the tribunal found that neither Mrs Corrigan nor Mrs Harrison was acting with the purpose of violating the claimant's dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment. It rejected the pleaded complaints about shielding, fit testing and PPE, lack of contact during sick leave, physiotherapy appointments, missed fortnightly reviews, recovery time after spinal treatment, pressure to return to the unit, refusal of coordinator duties, alleged disregard of concerns, and the suggestion to seek alternative employment. The tribunal concluded that none of the pleaded conduct met the section 26 test, and all three claims were dismissed.