Mr L Jones v British Transport Police: 1302657/2024
JUDGMENT
[1]The Respondent did not breach section 39 of the Equality Act 2010 by directly discriminating against the Claimant or discriminating against him because of something arising in consequence of disability in any of the following respects: 1.1. On 28 November 2023, by Lisha Kaur referring during a grievance investigation meeting to an email the Claimant sent to Sergeant Walsh on 13 March 2023. 1.2. On 25 August 2023, by Lisha Kaur describing the Claimant’s conduct at a meeting on 18 August 2023 as “borderline person and threatening”. 1.3. On 25 August 2023, by Lisha Kaur sending an emoji to a team WhatsApp chat in response to a message from the Claimant. 1.4. By Lisha Kaur requiring the Claimant to attend a meeting on 21 September 2023 regarding alleged unsatisfactory performance and conduct. 1.5. On 21 September 2023, by Lisha Kaur making multiple allegations regarding the Claimant’s performance. 1.6. On 31 October 2023, by Lisha Kaur emailing the Claimant making allegations related to his not carrying out actions and/or not following guidelines.[2]The Respondent did not breach the duty to make reasonable adjustments in relation to any of the following alleged provisions, criteria or practices (“PCPs”): 2.1. An expectation to work in the office twice a week. 2.2. A requirement to inform Vulnerability Coordinators if it was believed there were any discrepancies in the work they sent to Vulnerability Development Officers. 2.3. A requirement not to update colleagues by screenshotting guidance and sending it to them. 2.4. An expectation that the Claimant would go to its London office to collect a work mobile telephone. 2.5. An expectation that the Claimant would complete a personal development review in an hour on 31 October 2023.[3]The Respondent did not victimise the Claimant in any of the following respects: 3.1. On 10 November 2023, by Kimberley Sach inviting the Claimant to a first stage performance/disciplinary meeting. 3.2. On 4 December 2023, by Kimberley Sach sending the Claimant a revised invitation to a first stage performance/disciplinary meeting. 3.3. On 15 December 2023, by Kimberley Sach providing the Claimant with a first stage outcome letter. 3.4. On 11 January 2024, by Ashley Cooper providing the Claimant with a first stage appeal outcome letter. 3.5. On or around 1 or 4 December 2023, by Kimberley Sach informing the Claimant that he was required to go to its London office to collect a work mobile telephone. 3.6. On 14 November 2023, by Kimberley Sach referring the Claimant to its Professional Standards Department.[4]The Respondent did not breach section 40 of the Equality Act 2010 by any of the matters referred to at paragraphs 1.1 or 1.3 to 1.6 above.[5]The following complaints are dismissed on withdrawal: 5.1. The complaint of failure to make reasonable adjustments based on the alleged PCP that the Respondent expected the Claimant to update colleagues as to changes in guidance. 5.2. The complaints of direct discrimination and discrimination arising from disability based on the matters referred to at paragraphs 3.1 to 3.4 above. 5.3. The complaint of victimisation based on a telephone call with the Claimant’s temporary line manager on 24June 2024, in which the Claimant says he was told that his manager had been informed by Human Resources that working from the office twice a week would remain compulsory.