Reasonable adjustments

Case 1: The facts

Mrs 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 this amounted either to disability-related discrimination or to a failure to make reasonable adjustments.

The ruling

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) rejected O'Hanlon's claim, saying it would be "very rare indeed" for an employer to have to pay disabled employees enhanced sick pay.

Referring to the Court of Appeal's decision in the case of Nottinghamshire County Council v Meikle [2004] EWCA Civ 859, the EAT said there had been a very specific reason for the court to hold that Meikle was entitled to full pay: namely that she had only remained on sick leave because her employer had failed to make adjustments which would have allowed her to continue working.

Such a situation did not apply to O'Hanlon, and so there was no requirement for her employer to adjust its sickness policy. Although the application of the policy amounted to disability-related discrimination because O'Hanlon's absences were disability-related, the EAT said it was justified on the grounds of cost.

O'Hanlon v Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs UKEAT/0109/06