Claimant v Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal found that whilst the claimant suffered a substantial disadvantage from the PCPs (being placed in Ms Stone's counter-signing management chain), the proposed adjustments had no prospect of removing the disadvantage. The claimant's pathological fear of Ms Stone, caused by acute anxiety, was so entrenched that any mechanism permitting possible contact between Ms Stone and any proposed replacement CSM would be unacceptable to the claimant. The only step with any prospect of removing the disadvantage would have been to redeploy Ms Stone from the Directorate entirely, which was not reasonable given the disruption to the Directorate and loss of her skill set and experience. The claim failed despite the respondent having knowledge of the disability and substantial disadvantage.
Withdrawn by claimant prior to hearing and dismissed by separate judgment dated 3 May 2024.
Withdrawn by claimant prior to hearing and dismissed by separate judgment dated 3 May 2024.
Withdrawn by claimant prior to hearing and dismissed by separate judgment dated 3 May 2024.
Facts
The claimant, employed as a Business Change Manager since 2014, suffered from acute anxiety exacerbated by historic grievances against Ms Stone in 2018-2019. From summer 2021 onwards, Ms Stone became the claimant's counter-signing manager (CSM). The claimant developed extreme coping mechanisms to avoid contact with Ms Stone, including not attending meetings she attended and avoiding floors she worked on. Despite these strategies, her anxiety escalated to the point where in August 2022, when it appeared Ms Stone might conduct her performance review during her line manager's absence, she went on sick leave. The claimant requested that Ms Stone be replaced as her CSM. The respondent rejected this in February and March 2023, offering alternative adjustments instead. The claimant brought a claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments.
Decision
The tribunal found that whilst the respondent's PCPs placed the claimant at a substantial disadvantage due to her disability, the proposed adjustments (replacing Ms Stone as CSM either with someone from inside or outside the Directorate) had no prospect of removing the disadvantage. The claimant's pathological fear of Ms Stone was so entrenched that any mechanism permitting possible contact between them would be unacceptable. The only adjustment with any prospect of success—redeploying Ms Stone entirely—was not reasonable given the disruption it would cause. The claim was therefore dismissed.
Practical note
An adjustment that has no realistic prospect of removing the substantial disadvantage caused by a disability cannot be a reasonable adjustment, even where the employer has knowledge of the disability and the disadvantage, and even where the claimant's condition severely impacts their ability to work.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1403814/2023
- Decision date
- 28 February 2025
- Hearing type
- full merits
- Hearing days
- 3
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Role
- Business Change Manager
Claimant representation
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister