Mr G Plummer v Education for the 21st Century: 2300271/2020
| Judgment Date | 01 June 2021 |
| Citation | 2300271/2020 |
| Published date | 10 June 2021 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Subject Matter | Public Interest Disclosure |
Case No: 2300271/2020/V
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Mr G Plummer
Respondent: Education for the 21st Century
Heard on: 10th, 11th, 12th and 13th May 2021
and in chambers on 1st June 2021
Before: Employment Judge Pritchard
Members: Ms N Beeston
Ms Y Walsh
Representation
Claimant: In person, assisted by Ms G Taylor, a friend
Respondent: Mr A Griffiths, counsel
RESERVED JUDGMENT
It is the unanimous decision of the Tribunal that:
1. The Claimant’s direct disability discrimination claim is dismissed.
2. The Claimant’s claim of harassment related to disability is dismissed.
3. The Claimant’s claim that he was “automatically” unfairly dismissed
because he made a protected disclosure is dismissed.
4. The Claimant’s claim for unpaid wages is dismissed.
5. The Respondent agrees to pay to the Claimant the sum of £130.50 net in
full and final settlement of his holiday pay claim which is accordingly
dismissed upon withdrawal (credit to be given for any sums already paid in
respect of this sum).
REASONS
1. The Claimant claimed disability discrimination (he claimed he was a disabled
person by reason of his anxiety), public interest disclosure (automatic unfair
dismissal), holiday pay and unpaid wages. The Respondent resisted the claims
2. The Tribunal heard evidence from the Claimant on his own behalf and from the
Respondent’s witnesses: Geoffrey Bruce (Site Manager for the Ravensbourne
Case No: 2300271/2020/V
School); Samantha Moorey (Business Manager); Cathy Whiting (Chief
Executive Officer); and Emily Codling (Headteacher). The Tribunal was
provided with a bundle of documents to which the parties variously referred
together with a further bundle containing clearer copies of some of the
documents. At the conclusion of the hearing the parties made oral submissions.
Issues
3. Notwithstanding the fact that preliminary hearings had been held in this case
and case management orders issued, the Tribunal had been provided with no
agreed list of issues and detail of the Claimant’s claim remained unclear. The
Tribunal used the first day of the hearing to read the witness statements and
relevant documents in the hearing bundle. At the commencement of the second
day of the hearing the Tribunal discussed the claims and issues with the parties.
Upon the Claimant’s clarification of the claims he was making, the parties were
required to liaise with each other and to prepare an agreed list of issues. This
was put before the Tribunal at 2:00 pm on the second day of the hearing before
the Tribunal heard evidence in the case. The Claimant confirmed to the Tribunal
that the list was agreed and that it included the matters of which he was
complaining.
4. With slight modifications to the list put forward by the parties, and as agreed
with them, it reads as follows:
Disability
4.1. Did the Claimant have a mental impairment at the material time?
4.2. If so, did the impairment have a substantial adverse effect on the
Claimant’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities?
4.3. If so, was that effect long term? In particular, when did it start and:
4.3.1. Has it lasted for at least 12 months?
4.3.2. Is or was the impairment likely to have lasted at least 12 months or
the rest of the Claimant’s life, if less than 12 months?
4.4. Were any measures taken to treat or correct the impairment? But for
these measures would the impairment have been likely to have had a
substantial adverse effect on the Claimant’s ability to carry out normal
day-to-day activities?
4.5. The Tribunal also notes here that if the Tribunal were to determine that the
Claimant was a disabled person, the Respondent would deny it had
knowledge of that disability.
Direct Discrimination on the grounds of disability
4.6. Did the Respondent subject the Claimant to any of the following
treatment falling within Section 39 of the Equality Act 2010, namely -
Dismissing the Claimant on 19 September 2019?
To continue reading
Request your trial