Claimant v British Telecommunications plc — 2020

The claimant, who had bipolar affective disorder, had been absent from work following serious ill-health. The respondent had maintained regular contact and obtained occupational health evidence during the absence. The tribunal found no criticism of the respondent's conduct before the resolution and termination stage beginning with the meeting on 1 November 2017.

For unfair dismissal, the tribunal accepted that the reason for dismissal was capability, or alternatively some other substantial reason. However, it found that the dismissing manager failed to take reasonable steps to inform himself of the true medical position after the claimant said his position had changed and he could return to work. The appeal did not cure the defect because the appeal manager relied on an erroneous understanding that the claimant could only return to the defunct Resource Planner role and did not properly consider adjustments or alternative roles.

The direct disability discrimination claim failed because the tribunal found no evidence that the claimant was treated less favourably than a hypothetical comparator with similar absence and medical evidence issues. The discrimination arising from disability claim succeeded in relation to dismissal and appeal because those acts were not shown to be proportionate means of achieving the respondent's legitimate aims, although postponing the return to work pending updated occupational health evidence was found proportionate.

The reasonable adjustments claim succeeded. The tribunal accepted PCPs including fitness for work, attendance requirements, attendance at a particular office, and a remote management approach. It found that a combined package of adjustments, including phased return, earlier starts, travel and access-to-work support, homeworking when symptomatic, risk assessment, training, welfare discussions, and a mental health buddy, would on the balance of probabilities have avoided the substantial disadvantage and was reasonable.