Claimant v DHL Services Limited

Tribunal found no less favourable treatment occurred. The claimant was paid the 4% uplift despite not doing installations, was given an easier route after medical procedure, comparators were not appropriate, and the respondent had no knowledge of hypospadias. Treatment was not because of disability.

Tribunal found no unfavourable treatment. The claimant was paid the 4% uplift despite not doing installations, was given light duties on split route van, and the training course on 25 May 2022 was about heavies not installations. The claimant agreed to attend once he understood what was required.

Tribunal found the respondent did not have a PCP of preventing toilet access and a pass was provided shortly after request. The claimant was paid the 4% uplift despite not doing installations so was not disadvantaged. The claimant was never required to lift heavies until August 2022 at earliest and was suspended before then. The respondent offered two four-day shift patterns which the claimant rejected.

Tribunal found the alleged events did not occur as described. The training on 25 May 2022 was about heavies not installations and the claimant was happy to attend. The toilet pass was provided shortly after request on 7 March 2022. The tribunal did not find the respondent had the purpose or effect of harassing the claimant.

Tribunal found the claimant engaged in a protected act on 7 March 2022 but all 13 alleged detriments either did not occur or were factually incorrect. The claimant conceded several allegations in evidence. The tribunal found no link between the protected act and any alleged conduct.

Tribunal found no unauthorised deductions were made. The 4% uplift was paid from July to September 2022 in the September payslip. The deductions in June and July 2022 were adjustments to account for same day payments already made to the claimant to avoid double payment.