Claimant v Metropolitan Police Service
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that Ms Slevin's occupational health referral and her comment that she saw no evidence the claimant was happy at work were made with genuine concern for the claimant's welfare. These were the actions of a responsible manager, not harassment. The comments did not have the purpose or effect of violating the claimant's dignity or creating an adverse environment, and were not made because of the claimant's disability.
The tribunal found that Ms Slevin's mention of retirement as an option in November 2021 was perfectly reasonable given the claimant was already partially retired. It did not violate dignity or create an adverse environment. As for the alleged comment by Mr Noar about grandchildren, the tribunal found on the evidence (including absence from contemporaneous notes and email) that this comment was not made. Even if it had been made, it would not constitute harassment.
Facts
The claimant worked as a crime researcher for the Metropolitan Police for 37 years. She suffered from anxiety and depression and had significant sickness absence. She semi-retired in November 2019 to a three-day week. In August 2021, her line manager Ms Slevin referred her to occupational health, stating the claimant found it hard to cope with management or change. During a home welfare visit in November 2021, Ms Slevin suggested retirement was an option. The claimant raised a grievance, and at a grievance meeting in January 2022 alleged that the grievance officer Mr Noar told her to retire and look after her grandchildren. Her grievance was not upheld. She retired in April 2024.
Decision
The tribunal unanimously dismissed both harassment claims. The tribunal found that Ms Slevin's occupational health referral and comments about the claimant not appearing happy at work were the actions of a responsible manager genuinely concerned for the claimant's welfare, not harassment. The mention of retirement as an option was reasonable given the claimant was already partially retired. The tribunal did not accept the claimant's evidence that Mr Noar made a comment about grandchildren, finding it would have appeared in contemporaneous notes and emails if true.
Practical note
Managers discussing retirement as an option with an employee who is already partially retired and experiencing health difficulties does not constitute age harassment, particularly where raised with genuine concern for welfare and without pressure.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2300788/2022
- Decision date
- 1 October 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- emergency services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- crime researcher
- Service
- 37 years
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- lay rep