The Claimant, disabled with asthma, failed in proceedings for unlawful disability discrimination. She appealed.
The grounds of appeal challenged the Tribunal’s approach to the reasonable adjustments claim involving a complaint that the Respondent applied a PCP for employees to work in open-plan spaces, operationally allocated, in which the ambient temperature could not be controlled by an individual employee. The Claimant said this put her at a substantial disadvantage as a disabled person with asthma, and a reasonable adjustment would have placed her in a different office environment where she could manually control the ambient temperature. The Claimant also challenged the Employment Tribunal’s conclusions on her section 15 claim in relation to reductions in sick pay applied to the Claimant.
The appeal failed. There was evidence to support the Employment Tribunal’s conclusion that the Claimant failed to establish that the PCP placed her at a substantial disadvantage in this case. Medical evidence was part of the consideration, but was not (and was not treated as) a necessary requirement. Nor did the Employment Tribunal make any other error of law.
In relation to sick pay and the Respondent’s failure to extend the period of sick pay, the Employment Tribunal adopted the correct approach in considering whether the failures or refusals to extend (which were the unfavourable treatment complained of) were proportionate and justified. It held that the ability to apply for an extension (and appeal an unfavourable decision) introduced the flexible, individually tailored consideration necessary into the Respondent’s policy; and that there was a flexible approach that took account of the Claimant’s circumstances in this case. The Employment Tribunal’s finding that the Claimant’s treatment was proportionate was open to it on the evidence and not in error of law accordingly.
Citations:
[2018] UKEAT 0278 – 17 – 2404
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.625435