An employment tribunal in Manchester has ruled that a teacher with bipolar disorder was discriminated against by his employer. The employer continued with a medical suspension despite medical evidence that he was fit to return to work.
The tribunal heard that at the beginning of term, the teacher returned to school for a training session before pupils were due back. Senior managers along with other colleagues at the Trust witnessed behaviour that led them to believe the teacher was unfit to remain at work and suspended him. They felt there was a potential risk to the teacher himself and to pupils.
Their decision appears to take into account an Occupational Health report following a prior referral where the opinion that ‘he may be unfit for work’ had been expressed to the employer. The employee disagreed with this opinion and argued that the Occupational Health Assessor was not familiar with his condition. He presented evidence from a clinical psychologist who had no concerns that the teacher posed a risk to himself or others however the employer continued with the suspension – initially.
The tribunal found that the initial suspension was fair. However, the Judge cited that the teacher had “extremely quickly” provided the employer with medical evidence that required the suspension to be lifted. It was highlighted that the employer later appeared to change its mind and allow the employee to return to work on the basis of the medical advice, initially rejected.
To reinforce, the terms of any suspension should always be subject to ongoing review and communicated clearly with the employee. An individual should not be suspended for longer than is absolutely necessary.
In a separate claim, the teacher also argued that he was the subject of unfair treatment as he had been issued with a warning for short-term absence related to his disability and set a target of no further absence for a period of 4 months. The employee had been absent for a total of 42 days due to a mixture of mental health and neurological reasons and stated that his employer failed to carry out a return to work meeting for any of his absence periods. The tribunal ruled that the decision to issue a warning was not appropriate.
SAM and our sister company FusionHR recommend that return to work meetings are held following every period of sickness absence, regardless of duration. They are an important management tool to ensure that employees ate fit for work and any concerns can be managed. It is important to track these meetings and set monitoring rounds within SAM to maintain evidence in case it is needed.
If you need help with using SAM for return to work’s or monitoring rounds please get in touch with the team on 01924 907319.
If you have any queries about suspension, absence or any others HR matters, please get in touch with one of the team at FusionHR on 01924 827869.
