Bus Driver Sacked Whilst on Sick Leave Succeeds in Unfair Dismissal Claim

Dismissing a sick employee on medical grounds may be lawful and justified, but it is always something that is likely to attract close scrutiny by an Employment Tribunal (ET). In a case on point, a bus driver who was sacked whilst on sick leave, having suffered a stroke, succeeded in an unfair…

Apr 05, 2022

The driver was hospitalised for 13 days following his stroke and was on sick leave for over six months prior to his dismissal. The DVLA had revoked his Passenger Carrying Vehicle (PCV) licence and he had been told that he could not apply for a new one until 12 months after the date of his stroke. His dismissal letter stated that his employment was being terminated on medical grounds.

In upholding his complaint, an ET noted that, prior to his dismissal, he was making a good recovery. He was having no neurosensory difficulties and his sole remaining symptom was fatigue. Although his doctor had signed him off sick, a more recent occupational health report had stated that he was fit to return to work, albeit with some adjustments.

No account had been taken of the possibility of further significant improvement in his condition. The occupational health report indicated that his day-to-day activities were unrestricted and there was no evidence that it was impracticable to make any adjustments necessary to cater for his fatigue. Overall, the ET concluded that a reasonable employer would not have dismissed him on medical grounds and that the decision to do so fell outside the range of reasonable responses.

The ruling entitled him to a basic award reflecting his four years’ service. The ET concluded, however, that his compensatory award should be reduced by 70 per cent on the basis that the revocation of his PCV licence would have provided a potentially fair reason for his dismissal. It meant that, at least temporarily, he was not entitled to drive buses, the role for which he had been employed. If not agreed, the amount of his award would be assessed at a further hearing.

Employer Pays for Bypassing Trade Union – Supreme Court Ruling

Employers cannot with impunity make direct offers to trade union members with the aim of pre-empting the collective bargaining process. The Supreme Court made that point in confirming awards of compensation to 57 workers whose employer bypassed their trade union in search of a pay deal. The manual and shop floor workers were all members of a trade union. Following a ballot of workers, their employer recognised the union on a non-legally binding basis and they commenced formal annual pay…

Workplace Disputes and ‘Without Prejudice’ Discussions – Guideline Ruling

Litigation should always be a last resort and, as an Employment Tribunal (ET) ruling made plain, it is very much in the public interest to encourage employers to embark on confidential, without prejudice discussions with a view to achieving a non-confrontational resolution of workplace disputes. The case concerned a local authority employee who suffered from mental ill health and had been off work for some time. After he complained of alleged discrimination, a senior manager invited him to a…

Engaging a Tradesman? Do You Understand Your Health and Safety Duties?

If a tradesman sustains injury whilst working on a client’s premises, should the client be liable to pay compensation? The High Court pondered that important issue in the case of a builder who fell through a barn roof, suffering catastrophic injuries. The builder, who was in his late 50s, was engaged by a farmer to replace the barn’s guttering. Working alongside his son, he sensibly installed crawler boards so as to spread his weight on the barn’s fragile roof. As his son passed sections of…