Kuldeep S. Clair, Consultant Solicitor, offers his views

Some people would imagine that being persistently late to work every week would be quite inexcusable and a definite basis for dismissal. It could be argued that if an employee argued that his repeated lateness was due to a disability, he was just trying to pull a fast one on the poor employer, and that sympathy by an employment tribunal which entertained such an argument was a symptom of the ‘leftie legal establishment’ dragging the UK to the gutter.

You hear these kinds of arguments from many politicians, the right-wing press, and certain  ‘news’ channels constantly. But the legal position is very different.

In a case before an employment tribunal in March 2023, Mr Bryce, who worked as a security officer suffered from conditions including dyslexia and Asperger’s syndrome. Those conditions affected his cognitive functions in the mornings. He produced medical evidence to support that. He was five minutes late for his very first shift in his first week. In the following two weeks, he was late again. He suggested a grace period of 15-20 minutes to his employer, and explained his condition, but his employer refused and dismissed him.

Mr Bryce brought a claim for discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments. He gave evidence that his difficulties with timekeeping stem from his dyslexia, explaining that he must use both digital and analogue alarms to wake up in the morning as he struggles to read the time on the digital clock, meaning that he believes he has more time than he does. He explained that the knock-on effect of running late then serves to heighten his anxiety as this conflicts with his inflexible morning routines, which are a characteristic of Asperger’s syndrome, leaving him overwhelmed. Mr. Bryce described these factors as having a “domino effect” meaning that no amount of planning will prevent his lateness.

The Tribunal upheld the claim for discrimination arising from disability as the main reason for the treatment that he received. In all the circumstances, reasonable adjustments had not been made for Mr Bryce’s disability.

Comment

The judgement is entirely in keeping with the established law relating to disability discrimination, which was first established almost 30 years ago. After all, why shouldn’t a person who suffers from what amounts to a ‘disability’ in law (as defined by the Equality Act 2010) be protected in the same way as would an employee with an established physical disorder.  It has long been recognised that disabilities may be mental/intellectual, physical, and not even perhaps relate to the employee himself but a member of his/her family.

So no, I don’t think evil leftie lawyers and judges have taken over and undermined the fabric of this country in the last few years! The principles of equality and discrimination are very fair (although proving your case without expert professional legal assistance may be difficult).

 Note

Every employment case is different and depends upon its own individual facts. To arrange an expert initial consultation on your case for a fixed fee, please contact me on 07484 614090 or kuldeep@ksclegal.co.uk

Kuldeep Clair

Solicitor of the Senior Courts of England and Wales