Mr D Vasquez, Husband For the v Mr A Sutherland, Solicitor and 1 other — 2018

Mrs T Vasquez worked for Manpower as a temporary customer resolutions executive at VW Financial Services Ltd. The tribunal accepted that she was disabled by reason of Emetophobia, and that both respondents knew of the disability by 2 November 2017. It found that she had a mixed absence record over about eight months, including five occasions amounting to seven days that were disability-related and six occasions amounting to 12 days for non-disability-related reasons, and it accepted that she deliberately did not disclose the disability when she applied to Manpower.

The tribunal dismissed the reasonable adjustments claim against VW. It held that, as a matter of substance, managing the sickness absence of a Manpower worker was Manpower's responsibility rather than VW's, so the VW claim was misconceived. In the alternative, it found that VW was entitled to expect satisfactory attendance, that it was not reasonable simply to disregard disability-related absences, and that the allowance of three absences in three months was a reasonable adjustment. The tribunal also dismissed the section 15 claim against VW. It accepted that blocking the claimant's application for a permanent fleet role, and telling her that her temporary role would be reconsidered if she exceeded the attendance threshold, were acts arising in consequence of disability, but held that both were justified as proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of maintaining satisfactory attendance and good customer service.

The reasonable adjustments claim against Manpower was also dismissed. The tribunal found that Manpower wrote to the claimant's GP on 21 November 2017 asking about her condition, received a reply on 2 January 2018 suggesting occupational health, and then offered an occupational health referral in the grievance process. It held that the claimant had not established a relevant PCP that she would not be referred to occupational health, and it doubted that an occupational health referral itself was the adjustment sought. The tribunal further held that the timing did not assist the claim because the referral was offered before the claimant resigned.

The harassment claim against Manpower failed because the tribunal found that the 20 November 2017 meeting involved relevant questions asked with good intentions to understand the disability and its work implications. The victimisation claim against both respondents failed because, although the claimant had made a protected act by raising a grievance, the tribunal held that the monitored printing of emails at VW's offices on 23 February 2018 was not detrimental and did not amount to victimisation. No monetary remedy was awarded because all disability discrimination claims were dismissed.