• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Call us now: 01243 836 840   [email protected]
Pure Employment Law
  • Who We Are
    • Nicola Brown
    • Peter Stevens
    • Elena Elsam
    • David Jones
    • Linda Nye
    • Brenda Cherry
  • For Employers
    • Advice on HR and People issues
    • Investigations, Hearings and Appeals
    • Restructuring and Redundancy
    • Defending Employment Tribunal Claims
    • Dismissal of Senior Executives
    • Contracts, Handbooks and Policies
    • Employment Law Training
  • For Employees
    • Settlement Agreements
    • Workplace Issues including Disciplinary and Grievance
    • Bringing an Employment Tribunal Claim
  • Employment Law Events
  • Legal Updates
  • Testimonials
  • Vacancies
  • Contact us
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Disability discrimination – 3 recent cases

30th November 2015/in News /by Nicola Brown

It is unlawful for employers to discriminate (directly or indirectly) against workers, employees or job applicants who are disabled under the Equality Act 2010. The Equality Act also gives protection against discrimination ‘arising from’ disability as well as placing a duty on employers to make reasonable adjustments where a disabled worker or job applicant is placed at a substantial disadvantage.

In this article, we look at three recent cases which (although they are at Employment Tribunal level only and are therefore not binding law) provide useful examples of some of the issues that employers should be aware of in relation to discrimination arising from disability and the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Powell v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Ms Powell was a long serving employee at the DWP. She had frequent time off work due to ill-health, and some of her absences were related to disability. Under the DWP’s absence management procedures, formal action would be instigated where an employee had 8 days of absences in a 12 month rolling period. The DWP did adjust the trigger point for Ms Powell, so that action would only be taken once she reached 12 days’ absence.

Her absences went over the 12 days (by a few days) and she was subsequently dismissed, despite the DWP’s procedure stating that the decision to dismiss a disabled person should not turn on whether they had gone a day or two over the trigger point.

Ms Powell brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination arising from disability. The Employment Tribunal held that Ms Powell was discriminated against and should have been given more time to improve her attendance. She also won her unfair dismissal claim, and was awarded over £30,000 in compensation.

In this case it certainly sounds as if the DWP were much too quick to dismiss a long-serving disabled employee. It is always important to consider a fair procedure as well as any potential reasonable adjustments. Also, reasonable adjustments are not just in the sense of working hours or special equipment, they can include making adjustments to internal procedures too.

Corry v Merseyrail Electric 2002 Ltd

Mr Corry suffered from epilepsy, which he stated on his CV, and he had applied for a job at a train station. Mr Corry was offered the job, but the offer was conditional on him passing a medical. The medical concluded that Mr Corry was fit to work – but he should not work alone, or be allowed to work trackside.

The HR department at Merseyrail did consider what potential adjustments could be made, however as 90% of the job involved working alone or trackside they concluded that it was not financially viable or practical for them to take on Mr Corry and the job offer was withdrawn.

Mr Corry brought a claim for discrimination arising from disability and failure to make reasonable adjustments, however both claims were dismissed. The Tribunal found that withdrawing the job offer was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim (which in this case was ensuring the safety of employees and the public) and the suggested adjustments (which included employing a colleague to accompany Mr Corry) were not reasonable in the circumstances.

This case is a useful example of when the adjustments being sought by a disabled person go beyond what is reasonable.

Shields v Surrey and Sussex Police

Mr Shields was a police marksman who suffered from hearing loss following an inner ear infection. He underwent annual hearing tests and had successfully undertaken his role for 12 years. However, a new minimum hearing level was introduced. Mr Shields subsequently failed the new hearing test and was removed from firearms duties. The police force argued that it would be dangerous for him to be in the field, in case he mis-heard an instruction of “shoot” or “don’t shoot”, but Mr Shields said that this had never been an issue in previous years.

Mr Shields brought claims for discrimination arising from a disability, indirect discrimination and a failure to make reasonable adjustments (including a failure to allow him to take the hearing test used by the London Fire Service).

Mr Shields’ claims for discrimination arising from a disability and indirect discrimination failed, however the tribunal held that there had been a failure to make a reasonable adjustment, in that he should have been allowed the opportunity to take the hearing test used by the London Fire Service, which was the best available, and there were sufficient operational similarities between the police and the fire service.

As these cases show, it can sometimes be difficult to assess whether taking a particular course of action could amount to discrimination and, if in doubt, it is always best to take advice – we have years of experience of advising on ill-health and disability issues and would be happy to help.

We are experienced at advising on disability issues. If you would like to talk through a situation you are dealing with, or if you need advice on any aspect of employment law, please contact any member of the Pure Employment Law team (01243 836840 or [email protected]).

Please note that this update is not intended to be exhaustive or be a substitute for legal advice. The application of the law in this area will often depend upon the specific facts and you are advised to seek specific advice on any given scenario.
Share this article
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg 0 0 Nicola Brown https://www.pureemploymentlaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Pure-Employment-Law-logo.jpg Nicola Brown2015-11-30 10:14:172015-11-30 12:28:17Disability discrimination – 3 recent cases

Join our mailing list

* = required field
Mailing Lists


Recent Legal Updates

  • What to expect during 2021 – employment law developments 21st January 2021
  • Did “office banter” about an employee’s memory amount to age discrimination? 21st January 2021
  • Update on Furlough 20th January 2021
  • Restricting Restrictive Covenants? 20th January 2021
  • Q&A: What to expect from a remote Tribunal hearing 20th January 2021
Link to: Contact Us

Any questions? Why not get in touch!

Our advice is always given in plain English without any waffle, and we focus on providing practical solutions to our clients’ problems.

Contact us

LEGAL INFORMATION

Pure Employment Law | 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH
[email protected] | Tel: 01243 836840

Pure Employment Law is the trading name of Pure Employment Law Limited, registered in England and Wales with company number 07134294 and whose registered office is 1 Little London, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 1PH. Pure Employment Law Limited is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 533794. A list of the company’s directors is available for inspection at the registered office

DISCLAIMER

The information contained in this website is for general information purposes only. The information is provided by Pure Employment Law and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk.

Privacy Policy | Cookies Policy | Terms & Conditions | How to make a complaint | Sitemap

© Pure Employment Law 2021

Scroll to top

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies as defined in our cookie policy.

Accept Cookie Policy

Cookie and Privacy Settings



How we use cookies

We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.

Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.

Essential Website Cookies

These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.

Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refuseing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.

We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.

We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.

Google Analytics Cookies

These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.

If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:

Other external services

We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.

Google Webfont Settings:

Google Map Settings:

Google reCaptcha Settings:

Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:

Other cookies

The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them:

Privacy Policy

You can read about our cookies and privacy settings in detail on our Privacy Policy Page.

Privacy Policy
Accept settingsHide notification only