Member J McElwee Tribunal Member L Hutchison Mr Atif Aslam v Teleperformance limited — 2023

The claimant, who has multiple sclerosis, applied in September 2020 for a Customer Service Representative role with the respondent. The remaining claims concerned the respondent's decision not to offer him employment. The respondent knew of the disability and did not rely on a lack of knowledge defence.

The Tribunal found that the respondent decided not to hire the claimant because, in its view, he could not fulfil the requirements of the role on the Student Loans Company contract or achieve the required standard of service. It found that a non-disabled comparator who was similarly unable to meet those requirements would also not have been hired, so the direct disability discrimination claim failed.

For discrimination arising from disability, the Tribunal accepted that the decision not to hire was unfavourable treatment and that the claimant's inability to reach the required performance level arose from the effects of MS. However, it found that maintaining satisfactory service to clients was a legitimate aim and that no less detrimental viable alternative had been established. The indirect discrimination claim failed for similar reasons: the alleged rule against rehiring people dismissed for capability was not found to exist, and the PCP of meeting the job specification and performance requirements was justified.

On reasonable adjustments, the respondent accepted that a desk fan, proximity to toilets and the ability to raise one leg would have been reasonable if the claimant had attended the workplace. The Tribunal found those adjustments, and dictation software, only became relevant if employment began. It also found that the late-raised proposed adjustment of additional breaks was not reasonable because the number, timing, frequency and duration of breaks were uncertain and it was not established that breaks would have had a real chance of alleviating the disadvantage.