Mr D. Cooper v Travis Perkins Trading Company Limited — 2023

The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint had already been withdrawn and was dismissed on withdrawal by a judgment dated 19 July 2022. On the remaining disability complaints, the tribunal dismissed the section 13 direct discrimination claims. It accepted that there had been some different treatment in the way forklift truck incidents were investigated, but found the reason was the claimant's more senior Yard Manager role, his experience, and the tribunal's view that some of the forklift conduct was serious or deliberate, not his bipolar disorder. The tribunal also rejected the allegation that the investigation into alleged bullying of Paul McGarvey was discriminatory, finding that a detailed complaint from another employee warranted investigation.

On reasonable adjustments, the tribunal found that the respondent knew the claimant had bipolar disorder by around July 2021. It held that the disciplinary policy and the discretion it gave managers as to the structure and timing of the process was a PCP that put him at a substantial disadvantage because his condition meant he needed greater structure and certainty and was more vulnerable to stress. The tribunal held it was reasonable to suspend him in the circumstances, but concluded the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments during the investigation and disciplinary process by not providing pastoral support or EAP information promptly in writing, not setting out and sticking to a clear timetable, not allowing regular breaks, and not making the investigation notes promptly available. It also said it would have been reasonable to obtain occupational health input before starting the process.

The reasonable adjustments complaint about transport duties was dismissed. The tribunal found there was no PCP requiring employees at the claimant's level to take on additional transport duties, because the branch did not have a separate transport role and the work was shared. Without a PCP, that part of the claim could not succeed.

The harassment complaint based on 10 September 2021 succeeded. The tribunal preferred the claimant's account and found that Paul Ainsworth made disability-related comments that created a degrading, humiliating or offensive environment, and that this effect was reasonable in context. The separate harassment complaint based on the disciplinary hearing on 29 September 2021 failed: although the tribunal found the hearing comments about keeping answers brief were inappropriate and unfair, it found they were aimed at managing the hearing, were not related to disability, and did not amount to harassment. A one-day remedy hearing was to follow, and no compensation was determined in this judgment.