Mr E Eluwa (solicitor) For the v Mr R. Chaudhry — 2024

The claimant worked for Royal Mail from 22 July 2005. The tribunal found that the Deputy Manager role he had held from 2016 was an acting-up or substitution arrangement, not a permanent promotion. In June 2021, after a new Operations Manager reviewed management resourcing and sought feedback, the claimant was told to revert to OPG grade because of concerns including lateness, sleeping at work, lack of visibility and difficulties working with staff. The tribunal accepted that some of the complained-of steps occurred, including an unscheduled meeting on 4 June 2021 and reliance on manager statements, but held that the claimant's comparators were in materially different circumstances and that a hypothetical non-black African deputy manager with the same negative feedback would have been treated the same.

The direct and indirect race discrimination claims failed. The tribunal found that the allegations were not made out because the treatment was not because of race. It also rejected the suggestion that the question about the claimant's wife, and the later delay in the grievance process, were racially discriminatory. The harassment claim failed because the allegations of misconduct were unwanted but were performance feedback from colleagues and did not relate to race. The tribunal found the indirect discrimination PCP was the use of colleague feedback in evaluating deputy managers, but held that it was applied to all deputy managers in the region and did not put black African staff at a particular disadvantage.

On disability, the tribunal considered stress, anxiety, depression, low mood and insomnia, together with GP prescriptions, fit notes, counselling evidence and occupational health reports. It found the medical evidence to be poor, but accepted that by March 2022 the claimant's depressive episode had substantially impaired normal day-to-day activities. Even so, it held that he was not disabled before that date and that the impairment had not lasted 12 months and was not likely to do so, so he was not disabled at any relevant time. The disability discrimination claim therefore failed.

The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found the principal reason for dismissal was the claimant's refusal to engage with an Occupational Health referral on the basis that he said he was returning to a Deputy Manager role, whereas the respondent treated him as an OPG who had been acting up. It held that the respondent had made adequate efforts to consult and inform itself, had given the claimant numerous opportunities to change his stance, and that the dismissal was within the range of reasonable responses. The appeal was also found fair. The unlawful deduction claim failed because the claimant was only entitled to OPG pay after 7 June 2021 and his sick pay entitlement was reinstated after an initial hold.

The only successful claim was breach of contract in respect of notice pay. The tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to 12 weeks' notice but had received only 4 weeks, so it ordered payment of 8 weeks' OPG pay at £599.20 per week, producing a gross award of £4,793.60 subject to tax and National Insurance.