Employment Appeal Tribunal Upholds Ruling in Disability Discrimination Case Against Marks and Spencer
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has dismissed an appeal brought by a former manager against Marks and Spencer in a complex disability discrimination case.
• public
Case Background
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has handed down its decision in the case of Harkins v Marks and Spencer Plc, ultimately dismissing the claimant's appeal. The case involved a former Visual Merchandising Team Manager who alleged disability discrimination, harassment, and a failure to make reasonable adjustments.
The claimant, who suffered from depression, generalised anxiety disorder, and PTSD, had argued that her employer failed to accommodate her needs during her tenure. Her claims centred on various management interactions, including performance reviews and discussions regarding her working hours and potential adjustments to her shop floor duties.
Tribunal Findings
The EAT, presided over by Mr Recorder Seán Jones KC, reviewed several grounds of appeal. These focused on whether the respondent's management conduct amounted to harassment and whether the employer had failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disability.
Regarding the allegations of harassment, the EAT found that the original tribunal applied the correct legal tests. It concluded that the tribunal was entitled to find that management enquiries about the claimant's role were not aimed at creating a hostile or degrading environment. Furthermore, the EAT noted that the tribunal's findings on the respondent's lack of knowledge regarding substantial disadvantage were not perverse, as there was no evidence that the claimant had requested removal from shop floor duties or that such measures would have been effective.
Legal Significance
This decision reinforces the importance of the subjective test in harassment cases. It also highlights the limitations of an employer's duty to make reasonable adjustments when the employer has no actual or constructive knowledge of the specific disadvantage being suffered by the employee.
The EAT's judgment confirms that management must be able to address performance concerns and have open dialogues with employees, provided these interactions are conducted in a proportionate and professional manner.
Read the entire judgment here: Judgment approved by the Court Harkins v Marks & Spencer Plc
