Refusal to allow remote working requests for menstrual health condition leads to Tribunal compensation

A recent Employment Tribunal case highlights an employer’s obligation to make reasonable adjustments for employees who are disabled (under the Equality Act 2010) including reasonably accommodating requests to work from home and adapting attendance management procedures.

Background

The Claimant, an Administration Officer for the Ministry of Justice, made requests to work from home on consecutive days around 3 to 5 days per month due to menstrual health symptoms including migraines, pain and vomiting.

Such requests were initially agreed, but from around March 2022, the arrangement was withdrawn. The Claimant was required to seek approval from her manager who would consider the request based on business needs. If rejected, the Claimant was required to take sick leave. During 2022-2023, some of the Claimant’s requests were refused. The Claimant subsequently received stage 1 and final attendance warnings for unsatisfactory attendance which included the absences related to her menstrual health symptoms.

The Claimant claimed in the Employment Tribunal that the Ministry of Justice’s refusal of requests to work from home amounted to a failure to make reasonable adjustments and that the attendance warnings amounted to discrimination arising from disability.

Law

Under the Equality Act 2010, an employer has an obligation to make reasonable adjustments for disabled staff by making accommodations or changes to remove or reduce disadvantages faced by them.

Further, an employer can be liable for discrimination arising from disability when a disabled worker is treated unfavourably because of something resulting from their disability (such as time off because of the disability), not necessarily the disability itself. The discrimination can be lawful if it’s a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, meaning it’s a reasonable way to achieve a specific, justifiable goal.

Decision

Before the case reached a final hearing, the Ministry of Justice accepted that it had both failed to make reasonable adjustments when it had refused some of the Claimant’s requests to work from home (on 4 occasions), and that by issuing attendance warnings for periods which included disability related absence, they had subjected the Claimant to discrimination arising from disability.

The Employment Tribunal awarded the Claimant £29,065 made up of an injury to feelings award of £24,000 plus interest. The Judge assessed the case to fall within the middle Vento band (£11,200 to £33,700 at the time) on the basis that the injury to feelings persisted over a period of 17 months and had a significant impact upon the Claimant’s well-being and health including causing anxiety/disturbed sleep/tearfulness. The Judge found the discriminatory treatment did not however impact her career/promotion attempts and no loss of earnings were caused as she remained employed.

Comment

Although the Respondent refused some of the requests to work from home based on business needs, they ultimately accepted that by doing so they had failed to make reasonable adjustments. A significant injury to feelings award was made in this case despite the Judge accepting that the managers involved believed they were acting properly in accordance with absence policies and advice from occupational health.

Where an employee has health concerns which potentially amount to a disability, it is important to actively consider what steps can be taken to remove/reduce disadvantages faced by them by way of adjustments, and to understand and apply recommendations from medical/occupational reports with these overriding obligations in mind. Consideration should also be given to the application of and adaption of attendance management policies where an employee has disability related absences.

Case Reference: Ms G Platukyte v Secretary of State for Justice: 2200224/2024