Worker sues for incapacity discrimination

A pub employee sued for incapacity discrimination after claiming the Henry hoover she had been given to scrub up with was too heavy.

Lynn Taylor complained after her second shift that she had a foul shoulder and the traditional British vacuum cleaner she was supplied with was too heavy.

The arthritis sufferer stated she ought to have been given an ‘upright’ mannequin and likewise complained concerning the mop she had to make use of, an employment tribunal heard.

Pub proprietor Ainslie Richards fired her the subsequent day from The Coach House Bar and Restaurant, at Hoddom Castle in Scotland, as a result of cleansing was a part of the job.

Ms Taylor then sued Ms Richards’ enterprise for incapacity discrimination.

The tribunal dismissed her Henry hoover declare, ruling that the vacuum would have been simply as gentle as an upright one.

However, Ms Taylor did win nearly £3,000 because the panel dominated she was fired with none correct course of over considerations about her well being.

The listening to in Glasgow was advised Ms Taylor had been employed by the earlier homeowners of The Coach House earlier than Ms Richards took it over in the beginning of this yr – and that she sued them as effectively.

Ms Taylor utilized in January this yr and had her first day on March 1, with out disclosing that she was disabled by osteoarthritis.

She satisfied Ms Richards to additionally rent her carer – with out telling her she was her carer – with the intention that she would palm off cleansing and mopping to her.

Ms Taylor didn’t assume cleansing was a part of fundamental bar work, the tribunal was advised.

On March 2, Ms Taylor was given a Henry vacuum cleaner and mop and bucket.

‘Ms Taylor in response, made a request for an upright vacuum and a home model (squirting) spray mop’, the tribunal was advised.

‘She didn’t recommend when she was requested to scrub out the fridge, that she was restricted in her capacity to scrub out the fridge.

‘[The bar] declined to supply an upright vacuum, as they already offered a Henry vacuum, which was gentle and had a protracted hose pipe.

‘In use, the operation of an upright vacuum wouldn’t be lighter than a Henry vacuum, with regard to the final design and its lengthy hose and pipe.’

The pub additionally did not present a ‘squirty’ home mop because it wanted an industrial one.

That night Ms Taylor texted Ms Richards to say: ‘Sorry however I’m in agony tonight I can transfer glasses pour a pint and wash and wipe down.

‘Mopping and scrubbing fridges is just not doing bar work.’

She additionally claimed ‘I did let you know earlier than I began I used to be disabled’.

The subsequent day Ms Richards sacked her.

Later that day Ms Taylor despatched Ms Richards a protracted message saying ‘I’ve an issue with how I used to be handled at the moment and dismissed’ and advised her she was suing her.

She claimed she suffered ‘excessive ache’ in her shoulders as a result of she had to make use of a Henry Hoover and a mop and bucket.

Employment Judge Rory McPherson dismissed Ms Taylor’s declare of failure to make cheap changes, a type of incapacity discrimination.

The decide stated: ‘It wouldn’t have been proportionate, in circumstances, the place Ms Taylor had prompt that alternate home model spray mop be offered to permit her to mop the ground and additional had proposed that she be supplied with a upright vacuum which the Tribunal concludes wouldn’t have been materials lighter than the Henry sort vacuum, to allocate all cleansing (past glass cleansing) to different bar workers.

‘The Tribunal doesn’t settle for that that provision of Henry sort vacuum put her at a considerable drawback in relation to a related matter compared to non-disabled workers on the related time.’

However, the decide dominated she was ‘dismissed with none course of due to the priority over her well being’ and Ms Taylor gained a declare of incapacity discrimination.

Ms Taylor gained £2,986.83 in compensation.