Disability Discrimination by Association – Guideline EAT Decision

It may sound surprising, but you need not necessarily be disabled in order to suffer disability discrimination. As one case showed, it is legally possible for a non-disabled employee to suffer discrimination by association with a disabled colleague.

A sales manager was recruited by a…

Nov 15, 2021

Pexels rodnae productions 7580920 1024x683

It may sound surprising, but you need not necessarily be disabled in order to suffer disability discrimination. As one case showed, it is legally possible for a non-disabled employee to suffer discrimination by association with a disabled colleague.

A sales manager was recruited by a company’s sales and marketing director, who subsequently became disabled due to cancer. After both men were dismissed, the manager launched proceedings, asserting that he had been subjected to direct disability discrimination by association with the director.

Rejecting his complaint, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found that the employer had discharged the burden of proving that the director’s disability was not an operative reason for his dismissal. The employer had genuine concerns about both men’s performance and the evidence that the manager had been dismissed because of his association with the director was in any event extremely weak.

In upholding the manager’s challenge to that outcome, the Employment Appeal Tribunal noted that there was nothing fanciful in his contention that he could have been dismissed because of the director’s disability. Even if the primary reason for the director’s dismissal was his perceived poor performance, that did not preclude the possibility that his disability was also a material cause.

In noting the absence of direct documentary evidence of discrimination, the ET did not have regard to the fact that such evidence is rarely found. It erred in concluding that the employer had discharged the burden of proof, particularly in circumstances where the senior manager who decided to dismiss both men had, without apparent explanation, not been called to give evidence.

The ET also fell into error in giving insufficient reasons for shifting the burden of proof onto the employer and in finding that it could have had no deemed or actual knowledge of the director’s disability prior to his medical diagnosis of cancer. The manager’s claim was remitted to a differently constituted ET for fresh consideration.

Allergy Rules Should Be Tightened for Restaurants, Says FSA

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is urging the government to make it compulsory for restaurants to print allergy information on menus, in a bid to better inform consumers and limit the risk of extreme allergic reactions. There is currently no legal requirement for businesses to make allergens known to customers in print, although FSA guidance recommends they do this. In an effort to mobilise the hospitality sector into listing allergens on menus, the FSA now wants written information to be a…

Employed or Self-Employed? The Issue Can Present a Moving Target

The question of whether an individual is an employee or self-employed is highly fact sensitive and can, over time, present a moving target. That was certainly so in the case of a car body paintwork sprayer who, after setting up in business on his own account, eventually came to have only one customer. The man was the sole proprietor of a business that initially had three customers. He at first performed work for a vehicle sales company on three days a week, leaving time for him to serve his…

Unfairly Dismissed? You Must Take Reasonable Steps to Mitigate Your Loss

Those who are unfairly dismissed are required to take reasonable steps to mitigate their financial loss, usually by hunting for a new job. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) made that point in the case of a woman who made not one application for fresh employment in the three years after she was sacked. The woman, who worked for a financial services company, launched Employment Tribunal (ET) proceedings after she was dismissed, purportedly on grounds of redundancy. Following a liability…