Claimant v Chief Constable Police Service of Scotland

Tribunal found no evidence that claimant was treated less favourably because of her disability. Some alleged acts did not occur as stated (e.g. move to Stewart Street was only suggested, not required; occupational health referral was not refused, simply not progressed by either party). Other acts (heated phone call in April 2022) had no connection to disability. Tribunal held that even where matters had some connection to disability (e.g. adjustments), there was no evidence disability was the reason for the treatment or that a hypothetical comparator would have been treated differently.

Tribunal found respondent victimised claimant in how the 21 December 2022 meeting was conducted. Claimant had done protected acts (emails of 16 December raising disability adjustment issues and contacting Police Federation). Inspector Gow 'ambushed' claimant with unplanned 2-hour meeting ostensibly for return-to-work but which went far beyond that. He told her colleagues did not like her, she was not good at her job, challenged her adjustments, raised moving her to another department, and disparaged the Federation. Tribunal found Gow was annoyed by claimant going to Federation and this had significant influence on how he conducted the meeting.

Two other alleged acts of victimisation (denial of occupational health referral in October 2022 and rostering off sick on 16 December 2022) failed. Tribunal found these did not occur as alleged or did not amount to detriments. The occupational health matter was not refused, simply not progressed by either party. On 16 December, claimant chose to report sick herself; she was not rostered as sick by management.