Ms K Bajorska v GXO Logistics UK II Limited (Formerly Clipper Logistics Plc) — 2025

Ms K Bajorska, who was born in Poland and whose native language is Polish, brought claims of direct and indirect race discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. The respondent accepted that she was disabled. The tribunal found that most of the direct race allegations failed, but upheld one complaint at paragraph 3.13 of the list of issues: there was an unreasonable delay between the occupational health letter in May 2022 and the meeting on 7 September 2022 to discuss amended duties, and that delay was found to be less favourable treatment because of race.

The tribunal rejected the other direct race allegations, including complaints that Ms Radimonaite shouted, ignored the claimant, failed to give clear instructions, or complained about performance because of race. It found that some of the challenged conduct was either not made out on the facts or was consistent with the way Ms Radimonaite dealt with other employees, including other workers who did not speak English well. The allegation about a 24 February 2022 instruction to get back to work was found to be out of time and the tribunal did not extend time on a just and equitable basis.

The indirect race claim also failed. The tribunal did not accept that Ms Radimonaite had a proven practice of ignoring or treating less patiently workers who did not speak English well. It observed that, if such conduct had been proved, it would have been closer to direct discrimination because of its connection to Polish nationality rather than an indirect PCP within section 19 of the Equality Act 2010.

The disability claim succeeded. The tribunal found PCPs requiring warehouse operatives to do heavy warehouse tasks, lift up to 15kg, and stand while working in the labels department. It held that those PCPs put the claimant at a substantial disadvantage because of her disability, that the respondent knew or ought to have known of that disadvantage, and that the duty to make reasonable adjustments arose early in the employment and at the latest by 28 February 2022. The tribunal found that the respondent should have taken steps such as proactive assistance with identifying suitable items and allowing more time on labelling; it rejected reducing contact with Arune as a required step, and noted that the chair-in-labels issue had only arisen around 28 November 2022. No remedy was determined at this stage, and a remedy hearing was listed for 8 September 2025.