Ms A Kownacka v Textbook Teachers Limited Heard via Cloud Video Platform — 2021

Ms A Kownacka worked for Textbook Teachers Limited as a Recruitment Account Manager from 12 June 2017. She told the respondent on 11 May 2018 that she had found a lump in her breast, was diagnosed with breast cancer on 23 May 2018, and had surgery on 12 June 2018. The tribunal found that she was a valued employee and that the respondent's contract allowed it to monitor absence and require evidence after seven days. It also found that, in early June 2018, there was uncertainty about how long she would be off work and what treatment she would need.

On the direct discrimination and reasonable adjustments issues, the tribunal rejected the allegations that Ms Dunleavy made the quoted remarks said to have been made on 6 June 2018. It accepted that she asked for paperwork because the claimant had moved from saying she would be off for one or two weeks to saying she would be off until September, and held that this was a reasonable managerial request and not direct discrimination or harassment. The tribunal also dismissed the reasonable adjustments claim: it held that the requirement to travel did not disadvantage the claimant on the evidence, that no PCP requiring staff to be fully fit was established, and that the alleged requirement to perform without adaptations did not succeed because the claimant had already been told the respondent would accommodate hours and duties and, in any event, she did not return to work.

The tribunal found that Ms Paul did make the comments attributed to her on 6 June, 18 June and 13 July 2018, including remarks about time off, a 'free boob job', libido and a 'male Polish PE teacher', and that she also made the return-to-work and evidence comments in July 2018. It held that those comments were not direct discrimination because they were not less favourable treatment compared with a non-disabled comparator, but they were unwanted conduct related to disability which had the effect of violating dignity and creating an offensive environment. The harassment claim therefore succeeded, the respondent was held vicariously liable, and the tribunal found the claim in time as a continuing course of conduct and, alternatively, would have extended time as just and equitable. No quantified remedy is recorded in the supplied judgment text.