Reasonable adjustments

Case 8: The facts

Kathleen O’Hanlon had clinical depression; over a four-year period she was off sick for 365 days, 320 of which related to her disability. For all subsequent absences she was paid her employer’s pension rate, having exhausted the full-pay and half-pay provisions of its sickness policy. O’Hanlon claimed that her employer should have extended the period of full pay, and that its failure to do so amounted to disability discrimination.

A tribunal dismissed her claims, and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) agreed that there was no discrimination (see Workplace Report, November 2006).

The ruling

The Court of Appeal upheld the EAT’s finding that there was no disability discrimination. There was no less favourable treatment, as an employee absent with a sickness that was not related to a disability would have been treated in the same way by the employer.

Although the reason for O’Hanlon’s absence was related to her disability, her employer’s refusal to increase her sick pay was justified and therefore there was no unlawful discrimination.

O’Hanlon v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs [2007] EWCA Civ 283