Mr R Brown v BT plc Heard: Via Cloud Video Platform in the Midlands (East) Region — 2021

Mr R Brown was employed by BT plc as a Warehouse Supervisor at Magna Park and had also been acting up as a manager for several years, with an acting-up allowance paid except during holiday and sickness absence. He was off sick from August 2019 to 17 February 2020 with sciatica and back pain, and the tribunal accepted that BT knew he was disabled by reason of those conditions. It also accepted that his sickness absence and restrictions on driving arose in consequence of that disability.

Applying the section 15 Equality Act 2010 framework, including the two-stage approach described in Basildon and Thurrock NHS Foundation Trust v Weerasinghe, the tribunal upheld the complaints about removing him from the Acting Manager role and ceasing his acting-up allowance. It found that the managerial duties were still needed, that the respondent’s explanations for the change were inconsistent, and that the real reason for removing the responsibilities was his sickness absence. For the allowance, the tribunal accepted that rewarding work not carried out was a legitimate aim, but held that stopping the allowance without consultation or warning was not proportionate.

The tribunal dismissed the separate section 15 complaint about removing the claimant from his voluntary National Safety Lead role. It accepted that the role had to be carried out by someone present on site and that replacing him while he was off sick was proportionate, although it criticised the way BT handled the communication and said he should have been told.

On reasonable adjustments, applying the methodical approach in Environment Agency v Rowan, Royal Bank of Scotland v Ashton and Newham Sixth Form College v Sanders, the tribunal upheld the complaint that BT should have allowed the claimant to work from home or from Bedford or Milton Keynes during sickness absence and on his return. It found that he had told management the main barrier to returning was driving to Magna Park, that the respondent did not properly consider home working or local work, and that the adjustment would have removed the disadvantage. The tribunal dismissed the complaint that BT required him to do a more physically demanding warehouse role, finding that he was not actually required to do manual duties on return. No remedy was recorded in the judgment.