Mr A Hurle v London Fire Commissioner — 2020

The Claimant was employed as a Station Manager (Development) and was posted to Chingford, with a long commute from Hampshire. After starting work he was diagnosed with depression and later went on long-term sickness absence. Occupational Health initially advised that the commute was severely affecting his mental health and that a move to a station closer to home would be beneficial. The Tribunal found that by 19 May 2019, or in any event by 12 June 2019, the Respondent reasonably ought to have known that the Claimant was disabled.

The Tribunal found that the Respondent had a policy or practice of not transferring staff while on development, with an exception for exceptional circumstances, and that this placed the Claimant at a substantial disadvantage. A vacancy arose at Feltham and the Tribunal found that adjusting the policy and putting the Claimant forward for that vacancy would have been reasonable. It did not find that a transfer or continued employment would definitely have followed, but found there was a real prospect that the adjustment would have assisted his return to work.

For the section 15 claim, the Tribunal found that the Claimant's sickness absence arose from his disability, and that the Respondent subjected him to the disciplinary procedure and dismissed him because of that absence. It accepted the Respondent had legitimate aims connected to service delivery, pressure on colleagues, safety, attendance and financial pressure, but held that using the disciplinary procedure and dismissing when it did were not proportionate. The Tribunal considered that the Managing Attendance Policy and a further period of review were lesser measures that would better have balanced the parties' needs.

The direct disability discrimination claim was dismissed. The Tribunal found that although the decisions were influenced by senior management views and the Claimant's absence, it was not persuaded that the refusal to facilitate a transfer, use of the disciplinary procedure, or dismissal were because of disability for the purposes of direct discrimination.