Members J McCaig and P McColl Mr P Fisher v Represented by: Ms P Wild - Lay Representative Arnold Clark Automobile Limited — 2024

Mr P Fisher worked as a car valeter at Central Car Auctions and was accepted by the respondent to be disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, with PTSD arising from his Army service. His claim was that the respondent failed to make reasonable adjustments in relation to two PCPs: the requirement to work his contracted hours of 8am to 5.30pm, and a flexible working policy said not to take account of the armed forces covenant.

On the first PCP, the tribunal accepted that requiring the claimant to work his contracted hours was a PCP and that it placed him at a substantial disadvantage because exercise was one of the ways he managed his PTSD. The respondent proposed a later start on two days a week, but the tribunal found that would not overcome the disadvantage because the claimant said the gym was too busy in the morning and this could trigger his symptoms. The claimant's preferred adjustment, finishing one hour earlier on three days a week, was rejected as unreasonable because there was no evidence it would allow him to attend the gym when he otherwise could not, and the respondent's evidence showed a real business need for all six valets to remain available until 5.30pm to deal with the volume of cars and have them ready for auction the next day.

On the second PCP, the tribunal held that there was no evidential basis for saying the respondent's flexible working policy failed to take account of the armed forces covenant, and no decision had yet been made about time off for therapy. At the relevant time, the claimant's therapy appointments had not been confirmed, and the tribunal read Ms McMath's 24 May 2024 letter as ambiguous when isolated but not as a refusal once placed in context. Her later email of 12 July 2024 made clear that, once dates were confirmed, the respondent would discuss what it could facilitate. The claim was therefore not well-founded and was dismissed.