An administration officer at a magistrates’ court has been awarded more than £27,000 after succeeding in her disability discrimination employment tribunal claim against the secretary of state for justice.
Employment judge Bedeau found Hulya Findik’s claims of discrimination because of disability and failure in the duty to make reasonable adjustments well-founded.
Ms Findik had worked as an administration officer based at Highbury Magistrates’ Court from February 1998. She was assaulted in 2006 while travelling on the London Underground and in 2010 had an operation to remove a slipped disc in her neck.
An occupational health report in 2015 found Ms Findik’s neck pain could be managed and controlled with appropriate intervention and treatment and she was fit to continue doing her full duties and normal hours with some reasonable adjustments.
Employment tribunals
Hybrid work discrimination claim fails at tribunal
Ms Findik told the occupational health adviser that her neck pain may be aggravated if she served at the counter as that involved repetitive bending of her neck and repetitive stamping of documents. The adviser recommended that management should arrange an on-site workstation assessment to assess the feasibility of working at the counter.
A transfer to a different office in 2019 proved problematic as Findik had a condition called misophonia, a condition which lessens tolerance to various noises. Some managers had difficulties understanding the nature of this condition.
On 29 May 2020 during the Covid pandemic, Ms Findik resumed working at home. She did not have her complete ergonomic equipment, the tribunal heard, and that meant she had to crouch over her laptop, which triggered neck, shoulder, arm and back pains.
Ms Findik felt she could not travel into the office because of a heightened vulnerability to Covid caused by her asthma. Her employer felt, however, that the GP note Ms Findik produced did not amount to a “shielding letter”.
Neck pain
Between 7 and 23 August 2020 Ms Findik was off work because of neck pain through working without display screen equipment since 29 May 2020. The note from her doctor stated that she was unfit for work from 15 to 23 August 2020.
On 26 August 2020, Ms Findik was told she was expected to attend work in the open plan office and that her ergonomic equipment would be collected from her home on that day. Later in the day her ergonomic keyboard was collected and taken to the office. She told managers she would not attend the office.
A flare up in her conditions saw Ms Findik attend A&E in late August 2020. In September there was a disagreement between Ms Findik and managers over whether enough had been done to facilitate her return to work. The tribunal heard that Ms Findik’s condition of misophoniaI was widely misunderstood or not considered. In early October she asked why she had still not been provided with the equipment. This did not arrive until January 2021.
Managers issued Ms Findik with a formal written warning in February with regards to her absences. Her appeal against this was dismissed, thus triggering the tribunal case.
An improvement period was set that would last for three months and that should Ms Findik have a further two days or four spells of sick absence, she would be the subject of the next stage of the formal process.
‘Conscientious worker’
The judge noted that all the evidence pointed to the fact that Ms Findik “was and is, a hard, conscientious, worker and was willing to work but for sickness”. He ruled that slipped discs and fibromyalgia were the justified reason for her absences from work.
He further found the delay in providing an ergonomic keyboard was “longer than reasonably necessary” and a “tilted document holder would have prevented the claimant from having to bend her head down aggravating her neck”.
He added that a separate screen should have been provided to Findik and delay in providing these auxiliary aids meant that her symptoms continued for longer than was reasonable.
Judge Bedeau ruled: “It was neither reasonable nor necessary to have issued the claimant with a warning and to dismiss her appeal having regard to the reasons for her sickness absences. They were disability related. Her treatment was unfavourable and disproportionate.”
In a remedy judgment, the secretary of state for justice was ordered to pay Findik a total of £27,508.27 which includes £21,000 for injury to feelings and £8,508.27 in interest.
Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance
Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday
Latest HR job opportunities on Personnel Today
Browse more human resources jobs
