• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact

Daily Business Magazine

A magazine complement to the Daily Business website

  • Life, Arts & Leisure
    • Creative
    • Festival
      • Festival Reviews
    • Film
    • Food & Drink
    • Stage Shows
    • Life
    • Leisure
      • Rio Recommends – dog walks and cafes
    • Homes
    • Style
    • Travel
  • Opinion
    • Bill Magee
    • Craig Alexander Rattray
    • Karen Harvie
    • Keith Anderson
    • Russell Dalgleish
    • Terry Murden
  • Interviews
  • Notebook
  • Working Life
    • Careers & Management
    • Finance and legal
    • Technology
      • Tech Talk
    • Well Being
  • Daily Business News
    • All Content

Avoid wrong assumptions on disability

February 27, 2018 by Seanpaul McCahill of Navigator Employment Law Leave a Comment

There is an inherent danger in making assumptions about a person’s condition which could lead to a discrimination claim

Legal Matters Seanpaul 2The basic concept of the law on disability discrimination will be clear to most: it is unlawful to treat someone less favourably due to them having a disability.

Of course, in practice, disability discrimination is a more complicated beast, and it is possible (and common) to fall foul of the law even with no intention to actually discriminate against someone.

The Equality Act 2010 has further muddied the waters in this regard, as it introduced two new protections against discrimination. It is now unlawful to treat someone less favourably if they are associated with someone who has certain protected characteristics (e.g. a Catholic family member), or if you perceive the person to have such a protected characteristic even if they don’t (e.g. you assume them to be gay when they are not).

It is the latter, namely discrimination by perception, which is the focus of this update.

Chief Constable of Norfolk v Coffey – the facts of the case

Ms Coffey was a police constable with the Norfolk Constabulary (NC) between 1993 and 1997, with no difficulties in relation to her hearing. In 2011 she applied to become a constable with the Wiltshire Constabulary (WC).

A medical test at that time found that she had some hearing loss and tinnitus. In response to this, WC asked her to undergo a practical functionality test, which she passed. Ms Coffey was then able to work as a constable with the WC and her hearing did not present any operational difficulties.

In 2013, Ms Coffey requested a return to the NC and told them that she was experiencing some hearing loss. Ms Coffey sent the NC the results of the practical test that she undertook with the WC, which stated that no adjustments were needed to allow her to work as a constable. Ms Coffey passed her interview, subject to further fitness and health tests.

Those tests showed that she had substantial hearing loss in both ears and that she was technically unfit to be recruited into a constable role. However, the test report also mentioned that she was already carrying out the role in Wiltshire with no apparent difficulty, and recommended a practical test as had happened when she applied to join the WC.

Instead of following that advice, the NC sought a second opinion from another medical professional. The results from that test agreed with the previous ones and noted that Ms Coffey’s hearing levels were no worse than they had been in 2011. Importantly, the second medical opinion was that she would pass a practical test, as she had done previously.

As well as undergoing the NC’s tests, Ms Coffey obtained her own specialist report, which concluded that her hearing was stable. That report was sent to the NC but was disregarded.

The NC then made the decision not to employ Ms Coffey, primarily on the basis that her hearing could deteriorate and result in her being unable to carry out all the functions of a constable role.

The ET and EAT’s decision

Both the Employment Tribunal (ET) and Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that discrimination had taken place. More specifically, the EAT upheld the ET’s decision that the NC had perceived Ms Coffey to be disabled (even though she was not) and had treated her less favourably as a result.

The finding of perceived disability largely centred on the fact that the NC considered that Ms Coffey’s condition could progress to the extent that she would have to be placed on restricted duties. If that were to happen, there would be a substantial adverse effect on her ability to carry out day-to-day activities, which would bring her squarely within the definition of a disabled person. As such, it could not accept NC’s stance that it did not perceive Ms Coffey to be disabled.

In relation to the latter point, the refusal to employ her was clearly less favourable treatment.

What does this mean?

In essence, this case does not represent a paradigm shift in disability discrimination law. However, it does highlight the inherent danger of making assumptions about a condition, and how difficult it is to argue against having perceived something if you have made decisions based on those assumptions.

The case has also been useful in highlighting the EAT’s interpretation of the spirit of disability discrimination law. In its judgement, the EAT stated: “There would be a gap in the protection offered by equality law if an employer, wrongly perceiving that an employee’s impairment might well progress to the point where it affected his work substantially, could dismiss him in advance to avoid any duty to make allowances or adjustments.”

In other words, it is likely to be unlawful to try to avoid any future requirement for adjustments by making a decision not to employ (or to dismiss) someone not requiring those adjustments now.

There are also some clear flaws in how the NC dealt with the information that it had. It was provided with three medical reports that acknowledged some hearing loss but considered the applicant fit for the role.

Ignoring those reports and drawing its own conclusions was never going to be a safe move. While a medical report is not the only document to base a decision on, employers are generally expected to give them due consideration, which did not happen here.

If you have any questions on any of the issues raised in the above article, please contact Seanpaul McCahill.

Seanpaul McCahill is Legal & HR Manager at Navigator Law, part of legal services firm Vialex. He is a dual-qualified employment solicitor and chartered HR professional

seanpaul.mccahill@navigatorlaw.co.uk

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related

Filed Under: Careers & Management, Finance and legal, Seanpaul McCahill, Working Life Tagged With: disability discrimination, discrimination, discrimination law, Equality Act 2010, Navigator Law, Seanpaul McCahill, Vialex

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar



Editor’s Pick

Bill Magee

Securing safe passage to the metaverse economy

Terry Murden

… [More...] about Securing safe passage to the metaverse economy

Tim Key

Review: Tim Key – Mulberry

Andy Moseley

… [More...] about Review: Tim Key – Mulberry

Sook Edinburgh

Pop-ups give stores a new lease of life

Julena Drumi

… [More...] about Pop-ups give stores a new lease of life

Jason Byrne

Byrne and Bishop to play brain tumour gig

Julena Drumi

… [More...] about Byrne and Bishop to play brain tumour gig

Advertising



Footer

  • All Content
  • Site Map
  • Privacy Policy
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Email
  • LinkedIn
  • WordPress

Copyright © 2022 · Design by jPAD Consulting · Magazine Pro · Genesis Framework

We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
 

Loading Comments...