Is this a sign of the times? GP receptionist claims discrimination for refusal of remote working
Published Feb 23, 2023
Tracy Keown was denied a laptop and upgraded phone system to enable home working despite having the condition of microvascular angina. Practice manager Ms Butler of Staines Road Surgery (SRS) did not consider working from home 'practical'.
Keown resigned from Twickenham-based GP Surgery in February 2021 after working there since November 2019. During a text message to her practice manager on 17 March 2020, Keown "clearly informed" Butler about her microvascular heart disease. Butler said she was aware Keown had been investigated for heart problems, which were eventually diagnosed as microvascular angina. Keown's diagnosis placed her at high risk for covid and classified her as disabled. The British Heart Foundation guidance was also provided to the practice by Keown.
Keown was not given the opportunity to undergo a risk assessment as this would have enabled the surgery to consider reasonable adjustments as set out by the Guidance to General Practitioners issued on 6 April 2020.
The tribunal rejected the surgery's argument that a risk assessment was unnecessary because they had already put general practices in place to protect staff; no additional evaluations needed.
The Richmond Clinical Commissioning Group announced on 23 March 2020 that high-risk employees were to work from home by default and that tools to facilitate home working should be prioritised for staff. According to the jury, SRS knew Keown was at high risk by this time and should have put tools in place to enable home working.
The surgery argued that Keown could not work from home because she had to perform "certain tasks". The judge disagreed, finding Keown had never carried out these tasks previously.
According to the judge, "SRS could have provided a laptop, diverted the telephone line to the home, and reallocated work among other reception staff to enable the claimant to work from home."
Tribunal findings
Keown was found to have been placed a substantial disadvantage compared to others without a disability. The tribunal awarded damages of £45,000 for failure to make reasonable adjustments, discrimination based on disability and health and safety violations.
Learning for employers
Despite this being a pandemic-related case, this demonstrates how there has been a shift to remote working. Employers could find it increasingly difficult to refuse reasonable adjustments to enable remote working to employees with a disability. An employer is responsible for making reasonable adjustments when a disabled worker faces a "substantial disadvantage" compared to a non-disabled worker.
Employers should:
- Explore how to create a safe, fulfilling and inclusive workplace for all employees, including those who may be disabled
- Understand it is their responsibility, not the employee's and investigate what reasonable adjustments can be put in place and pay any associated costs
- Ensure risk assessments are carried out and enlist occupational health to understand what adjustments could be made
- Give careful thought as to whether the suggested adjustment could be considered "reasonable" and enable the employee to continue in their role
- Regularly check in with the employee once adjustments are in place to review how things are going and ensure the adjustments continue to work
Sources: Nicola Harding, www.footanstey.com