Officer given inexperienced gentle to take his power to discrimination tribunal

A police officer has been given the green light to take his force to an employment tribunal for discrimination after he was ordered not to bring his dog to work.

Detective Sergeant Mathew Parker told bosses he needed his ‘psychiatric assistance’ pet Koda with him to help with his autism and other mental conditions.

But when he brought the animal in without permission, he was sent away by a detective inspector who told him to come back without the animal, an employment tribunal heard.

DS Parker sued Hampshire Police for disability discrimination, claiming that three other staff members had been allowed to bring assistance dogs to work.

After a preliminary hearing, he has been given permission for his case to be heard in full to decide whether the force’s treatment of him was fair.

The tribunal held in Southampton, Hampshire, heard that DS Parker has worked for the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary since 2004.

Stock image of a service dog. Detective Sergeant Mathew Parker told bosses he needed his ‘psychiatric assistance’ pet Koda with him to help with his autism and other mental conditions, but was told he couldn’t bring his dog to work 

The experienced officer suffers from autism, ADHD, PTSD, depression and anxiety, the hearing was told.

At the time he made his claim he worked in the force’s digital investigations team.

DS Parker first asked to bring his dog to work in in December 2021 but after his manager made enquiries he was later told he could not bring Koda to work.

 However, the tribunal heard that during the early part of 2022 the officer brought Koda to a digital forensic lab and was told by Detective Inspector Alex Hall to leave and return without his dog.

In January 2023, DS Parker asked again if he could bring his assistance dog to work and was told by the force’s Human Resources department that further occupational health advice was needed.

The tribunal heard that there were two other police officers and a staff member who had PTSD and did have assistance dogs but this was the exception, not the rule.

Employment Judge Catherine Rayner said: ‘The fact that some individuals were able to convince the (police) that they should be allowed to bring the dogs in, was an exception to the usual practise of not allowing assistance dogs into the workplace.

‘Whilst there was no formal policy there was a practise as indicated by the treatment of [DS Parker] which I am satisfied would also have applied to others.’

DS Parker has also alleged that Hampshire constabulary created a ‘pressured environment’ with their process for promotion to Inspector and that deliberately ambiguous questions were asked.

Interviewees go through a scenario-based process where they are given the questions half an hour before the interview.

DS Parker said this criteria disadvantages neurodiverse employees because it is harder for them to process the information in that time.

EJ Rayner concluded that the force did use this process but did not make a judgement on its impact at this stage.

The full tribunal will be held at a later date.