Mr A Obiezewani v Poundland Ltd (England and Wales : Disability Discrimination) -[2019] UKET 2301499/2018- (25 February 2019)

Key Facts

Issues

• The first issue is whether the Claimant's inability to perform manual tasks (moving stock, filling shelves, taking deliveries) due to his rotator cuff injury and wrist disability constituted unfavourable treatment under s.15 of the Equality Act 2010. The Claimant alleges he was required to undertake these tasks despite his disability, placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), and ultimately dismissed as a result. The Tribunal must determine if this treatment was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim or if it amounted to discrimination arising from disability.
• The second issue concerns the Respondent's alleged failure to make reasonable adjustments under s.20-21 of the Equality Act 2010. The Claimant argues the Respondent applied a policy/provision/criterion/practice (PCP) of not allowing managerial transfers to different store locations and not providing assistant managers, which placed him at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled employees. He claims these adjustments (transfer to Penge/Catford stores with existing assistant managers) would have mitigated his disability-related challenges. The Tribunal must assess if the Respondent had a duty to make these adjustments and whether they failed to do so.

Holdings

• The Tribunal dismissed the Claimant's disability discrimination claim, finding that he was not required to perform manual tasks (e.g., moving stock, unloading deliveries) due to his role as a Store Manager, which involved delegation to junior staff. The unfavourable treatment (PIP, dismissal) was determined to stem from poor store management performance, not disability-related constraints.
• The Tribunal concluded the Respondent did not fail to make reasonable adjustments by denying a transfer to a closer location or withholding an assistant manager. The Claimant did not establish a substantial disadvantage linked to his disability, as staffing shortages affected all managers similarly, and there was no medical evidence supporting transfer necessity due to his injury.

Legal Principles

• The tribunal considered the duty under section 21 of the Equality Act 2010, which requires employers to make reasonable adjustments if a provision, criterion, or practice (PCP) places a disabled person at a substantial disadvantage.
• The tribunal applied the reversed burden of proof under the Equality Act 2010, where the claimant must prove facts that could indicate unlawful discrimination, and the respondent must then demonstrate they did not act unlawfully.
• The tribunal applied section 15 of the Equality Act 2010, which states that an employer does not discriminate if they can show the treatment is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, even if it arises from the employee's disability.

Precedent Name

• Basildon v Thurrock NHS Foundation Trust v Weerasinghe
• Environment Agency v Rowan
• City of York V Grosset
• General Dynamics Information Technology Ltd v Carranza

Cited Statute

Judge Name

Passage Text

• We do not accept that the Claimant was placed at a substantial disadvantage in comparison to those without a rotator cuff injury by not being permitted to transfer, so that a duty to make a reasonable adjustment arose.
• The issue for the Tribunal was not whether his dismissal for poor performance was fair or justified, but whether the Respondent discriminated against him contrary to sections 15, 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010 and we find that it did not.
• We are satisfied that the Claimant was not subjected to the unfavourable treatment referred to in paragraph 39a above. He was not required, to do such manual tasks, nor was he left with no practical alternative but to do them.