Claimant v Cadence BPO Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found the claimant had requested a back support but stated she actually needed a seat that was not broken, which she never requested. There was no evidence her absences were caused by back pain. The respondent did not fail to take reasonable steps regarding the auxiliary aid the claimant identified as needed.
The tribunal found the respondent did accept and copy the claimant's medical alert card. The respondent could not share confidential medical information with colleagues without express authorisation from the claimant, which was never given. There was no PCP of refusing to accept medical information, and the respondent acted properly regarding employee confidentiality.
The tribunal found the offices were well ventilated with opening windows along one side and air conditioning vents. When the claimant requested to sit by a window on 21 November 2024, manager Sahl Gray immediately rearranged seating so she could sit beside a window she could open and close. There was no evidence the claimant picked up infections due to poor ventilation.
Facts
The claimant worked as a Sales Executive from August 2024 to June 2025. She has psoriatic arthritis and a back condition (both conceded as disabilities, though respondent knowledge of back condition was disputed). She claimed the respondent failed to provide an adequate chair with back support, refused to share her immunocompromised status with colleagues, and failed to provide adequate ventilation. The tribunal found managers were told of her back condition in September and December 2024, but the claimant never requested a non-broken chair (what she said she actually needed). The respondent did copy her medical alert card but could not share confidential medical information without her express consent. The office was found to be well-ventilated and when she requested window seating in November 2024, it was immediately provided.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed all three reasonable adjustment claims. On the chair issue, the claimant never requested what she actually needed (a non-broken chair) and there was no evidence her absences were caused by back pain. On medical information sharing, the respondent properly maintained confidentiality and could not disclose without the claimant's express consent, which was never given. On ventilation, the office was adequately ventilated and when the claimant requested window seating, it was immediately arranged.
Practical note
Even where disability status is conceded, reasonable adjustment claims will fail if the claimant does not clearly request the adjustment they actually need, and employers are entitled to maintain medical confidentiality unless given express consent to share information with colleagues.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8000320/2025
- Decision date
- 15 December 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 2
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Name
- Cadence BPO Ltd
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Employment details
- Role
- Sales Executive
- Service
- 10 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No