Employment > Disability. Employer won't make Reasonable Adjustments. I might be fired

[Avery]

Update: I have since phoned the court again and I spoke to someone else. The guy confirmed that the respondent did actually submit an ET3 on time, and after this has been shown to the judge I will receive a copy, probably in the next 1 or 2 weeks.

I will post here again when I have my copy of the ET3.

[Avery]

Just a couple of words of caution.

1. There may be a request for an extension that has already been submitted by the respondent that is being considered and for which you may be informed to give your response.
2. The respondent may still submit a request for extension albeit late.
3. The Judge can order that the ET1 be served again on the respondent.

Thank you. The woman I spoke to at the court had a thick foreign accent and didn't seem to have a very good vocabulary. If I had bought something from a shop and needed to ask for a refund this wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest.

However, seeing as she was updating me about my case, I found this frustrating. I had to ask her the same questions several times just to get an intelligable response, so I still didn't feel very reassured by the end of the call.

I think I will phone the court again soon and see what they say.

[ULA]

Just a couple of words of caution.

1. There may be a request for an extension that has already been submitted by the respondent that is being considered and for which you may be informed to give your response.
2. The respondent may still submit a request for extension albeit late.
3. The Judge can order that the ET1 be served again on the respondent.

[Avery]

Update: I was informed that my claim was accepted by the court on 31 Jan, and that my former employer would also receive a copy of my claim, and they would have 28 days to respond.

Their deadline was 28 Feb. Looking online I noticed that my case was updated on 28 Feb, but when I click on my case to see the details - there are no updates (no ET3, etc).

So, I phoned the court today, and the woman I spoke to confirmed that the respondent has not submitted an ET3 within the deadline, and therefore this would be handed to the judge. She also explaned that they have a backlog, so the judge hasn't been handed this yet.

I have to say I am astonished to hear that no ET3 was submitted !!!

[Avery]

Your SoL needs to be based on what a tribunal can order your employer to pay you if you win a claim for discrimination, A tribunal can order an employer to pay compensation for:

• any money you have lost due to the discrimination - known as financial loss and covers loss up to when you are likely to get a new job if you have lost your job
• hurt or distress you have suffered because of the discrimination - this is called 'injury to feelings'
• a personal injury, such as depression or a physical injury, caused by the discrimination
• particularly bad behaviour by your employer - often called "aggravated damages"

Thank you again Ula.

I have submitted my claim now.

Re "a personal injury, such as depression or a physical injury, caused by the discrimination" I used the latest Vento Band to approximate the figure (£) for this:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Vento-bands-presidential-guidance-April-2022-addendum.pdf

I also referenced two case laws to back up the 'indirect harm':

McGhee vs National Coal Board (1972)
Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd & Ors (2002)

I would like to thank you for all your help. Much appreciated

[ULA]

Your SoL needs to be based on what a tribunal can order your employer to pay you if you win a claim for discrimination, A tribunal can order an employer to pay compensation for:

• any money you have lost due to the discrimination - known as financial loss and covers loss up to when you are likely to get a new job if you have lost your job
• hurt or distress you have suffered because of the discrimination - this is called 'injury to feelings'
• a personal injury, such as depression or a physical injury, caused by the discrimination
• particularly bad behaviour by your employer - often called "aggravated damages"

[Avery]

Yes by post but it needs to arrive by the deadline. You can also check with your local Tribunal office whether they will accept email with the ET1 attached.

Thank you. I managed to get through to them. The guy said it was ok for me to add all my documents together into one PDF.

I can now submit my claim online. The deadline is today.

I think I just have one question before I submit my claim... which is about my Schedule of Loss. I want to charge my employer for all the Relapses that happened to me during my rehabilitation, because they forced me to 'race' to get well within a fixed timeframe. This caused several relapses.

I have put the total cost for the 7 relapses: £5,000. I have described them as causing ' indirect harm '.
Some I have charged less money, but others I charged more because the relapse was more severe and painful.

I would be very grateful if you could please share your view on this?

[ULA]

Yes by post but it needs to arrive by the deadline. You can also check with your local Tribunal office whether they will accept email with the ET1 attached.

[Avery]

.

I wrote a comprehensive reply, but it looks like it never displayed. I'm tired and I can't remember what I wrote now, sorry.

I have been trying to submit my claim online, and the Gov site asks for either a 2500 character summary, or an uploaded doc as a summary. My summary was over 2500 words, so I got a warning... so I reduced it, and now I can't proceed because it's stuck - keeps giving me the same old warning, even though I now have Under 2500 characters.

I am going to look at this again tomorrow, which is my deadline.

The site doesn't seem to allow us to upload an ET1 of a PoC (except for the invitation for us to upload a mere summary)... I certainly want to give them more than a measily 2500 characters...

Q :: Is there another way that enables us to submit a claim please?

[Avery]

When I was talking about hybrid roles ,I was asking when you requested if you could work from home did you ask to work full time from home or perform a hybrid role where you worked in home and the office. Or maybe on a rehab increasing your hours in the office over a period of time.

Just to confirm, I did offer to keep working full time from home. This was not permitted by my line-manager, who ordered me to stop work.

My line-manager made this decision based on the big boss of the entire organisation, who had issued a new policy of 'no working full time from home' and ordering everyone to return to the office... I was told by my line-manager that this applied to me also.

I believe that this policy of the big boss is a contravention of s19 Indirect discrimination, and by directing all their subordinates (including my line-manager) to carry out this policy is a contravention of s111 Instructing, causing or inducing contraventions.

The big boss is the Principle, so is therefore also liable for all of the actions of the various Agents, due to vicarious liability (s109).

I believe that this (s19) is the strongest part of my claim.

I also asked if the data you deal with is data that needs to kept private and secure.

The data I deal with is meant to be kept private, but I was given access to the employer's VPN software during the lockdowns in order to achieve this. All the staff worked from during the lockdowns using this system.

[Ukmicky]

Going by a previous reply your disability if you have one is mental health related ,so how have they contravened those 4 sections by not removing the lifting from your office role.

As they do not have to consider your back issue as a disability and as your doctor has said your back problems were temporary they did not have to allow you to return to work and was entitled to order you to remain off sick due to your back problems . Even if your back was deemed to be a disability as defined by the equality act they still had the option to keep you of sick until you were closer to full fitness .

We often do this to employees who are not anywhere fit enough to to return to there normal role as it can be the safest course of action for the employee and employer. An employer must be satisfied they can maintain the health and safety of their employees .

We will allow then to return to work before they are fully fit but that is usually when they are near full fitness and we can put them on a rehab plan which is designed to increase there duties over a 4 to 6 week period with the aim of them returning to their normal role afterwards.

You even said previously the occu health said

‘When asked to talk about adjustments, he just said that "he is currently unfit to be at work and no adjustments will expedite his return to work at this stage".
He doesn't talk about lifting.’’

so going by that they did the right thing to keep you off work .

When I was talking about hybrid roles ,I was asking when you requested if you could work from home did you ask to work full time from home or perform a hybrid role where you worked in home and the office. Or maybe on a rehab increasing your hours in the office over a period of time.

I also asked if the data you deal with is data that needs to kept private and secure.


I think you need to go find a solicitor who can look through your case to determine what your chances of success are. They will have solicitors who will go through your case with a fine tooth comb looking for legal misunderstandings,discrepancies or inaccuracies in your case.

[Avery]

Hi, I have an important question about my claim, there is something that I think I have overlooked, until now.

I am working on my PoC and I have described each incident in which I was discriminated against. However, I am unsure as to whether or not I am allowed to claim that one incident contravened multiple sections of the Equality Act.

For example;

Middle-management told my Line-manager that the 'lifting / carrying' element of my role could not be removed.

My understanding so far is that Middle-management has contravened these 4 sections in this one incident alone ::

s15 Discrimination arising from disability
s19 Indirect discrimination
s20(3) Duty to make adjustments (...provision, criterion or practice of A's puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage...)
s39(2) Employees and applicants

Q :: Am I allowed to claim that this one incident contravened multiple sections... or do I have to choose just one section per incident?

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

EqA Part 2 Equality; Chapter 2 Prohibited conduct; s15 Discrimination arising from disability
Link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/15

(1) A person (A) discriminates against a disabled person (B) if—
(a) A treats B unfavourably because of something arising in consequence of B's disability, and
(b) A cannot show that the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.


EqA Part 2 Equality; Chapter 2 Prohibited conduct; s19 Indirect discrimination
Link:https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/19

(1) A person (A) discriminates against another (B) if A applies to B a provision, criterion or practice which is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a provision, criterion or practice is discriminatory in relation to a relevant protected characteristic of B's if—
(a) A applies, or would apply, it to persons with whom B does not share the characteristic,
(b) it puts, or would put, persons with whom B shares the characteristic at a particular disadvantage when compared with persons with whom B does not share it,
(c) it puts, or would put, B at that disadvantage, and
(d) A cannot show it to be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.


EqA Part 2 Equality; Chapter 2 Prohibited conduct; s20 Duty to make adjustments
Link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/20

(3) The first requirement is a requirement, where a provision, criterion or practice of A's puts a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with persons who are not disabled, to take such steps as it is reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage.


EqA Part 5 Work; Chapter 1 Employment; s39 Employees and applicants
Link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/39

(2) An employer (A) must not discriminate against an employee of A's (B)—
(a) as to B's terms of employment;
(b) in the way A affords B access, or by not affording B access, to opportunities for promotion, transfer or training or for receiving any other benefit, facility or service;
(c) by dismissing B;
(d) by subjecting B to any other detriment.

[Avery]

They have to give you a reasonable amount of time to get your self medically fit. In doing so i would assume they would expect you to follow your physician or physiotherapist advice .

As for working at home are we talking hybrid duties where someone works both in the home and office or all the time at home . There is a big difference between the two and I assume your not talking about hybrid duties. Also do you work with sensitive or private data that needs to be kept secure.

Thanks for posting.

While I was signed off on medical leave, I was not working, and I was based at home. This is when I experienced harmful relapses... so, I was still on the payroll, but this didn't happen while working in a hybrid role.

[Ukmicky]

I am working on my PoC form and it is coming together.
However, I have thought of something that my employer has done, which I don't think is covered by the Equality Act.
After being ordered to stop working from home (and stop working completely), I was given a fixed time-frame to rehabilitate, in which I would lose my job at the end of the time-frame if I wasn't fit to return to the office.
During this time I attempted to rehabilitate my back as quickly as possible, which sometimes led to Relapses in which I re-injured my back. This was caused by adding too much resistance too soon during daily physiotherapy workouts, which actually ended up setting me back.
I already understand that imposing the blanket policy of 'no more working from home' is a contravention of either:
EqA s15 Discrimination arising from disability
–or–
EqA s19 Indirect discrimination
However, the fact that their imposed time-frame caused me to rush physio faster than was safe to do so, caused me "Harm".
I have started reading the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, and have already read the HSE guidance (https://www.hse.gov.uk/simple-health...safety-law.htm) ... but I cannot see references to harm being caused by the employer indirectly, while outside of the workplace.
Q :: Does such a thing exist? Laws to protect staff from harm whilst being employed, but not in the workplace?
Any help would be much appreciated.

They have to give you a reasonable amount of time to get your self medically fit. In doing so i would assume they would expect you to follow your physician or physiotherapist advice .

As for working at home are we talking hybrid duties where someone works both in the home and office or all the time at home . There is a big difference between the two and I assume your not talking about hybrid duties. Also do you work with sensitive or private data that needs to be kept secure.

[Avery]

I am working on my PoC form and it is coming together.

However, I have thought of something that my employer has done, which I don't think is covered by the Equality Act.

After being ordered to stop working from home (and stop working completely), I was given a fixed time-frame to rehabilitate, in which I would lose my job at the end of the time-frame if I wasn't fit to return to the office.

During this time I attempted to rehabilitate my back as quickly as possible, which sometimes led to Relapses in which I re-injured my back. This was caused by adding too much resistance too soon during daily physiotherapy workouts, which actually ended up setting me back.

I already understand that imposing the blanket policy of 'no more working from home' is a contravention of either:

EqA s15 Discrimination arising from disability
–or–
EqA s19 Indirect discrimination

However, the fact that their imposed time-frame caused me to rush physio faster than was safe to do so, caused me "Harm".

I have started reading the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974, and have already read the HSE guidance (https://www.hse.gov.uk/simple-health...safety-law.htm) ... but I cannot see references to harm being caused by the employer indirectly, while outside of the workplace.

Q :: Does such a thing exist? Laws to protect staff from harm whilst being employed, but not in the workplace?

Any help would be much appreciated.