Discrimination ?

nathanjpj

sangie595 wrote: »

There is also no law for the NHS.

"Some employers have policies separating disability-related sickness absence from other illness absence. And some have a policy allowing 'disability leave’. They are not legal requirements for employers, but are good practice in the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s
Employment Statutory Code of Practice.

Such policies are more common in the public sector, and in private or voluntary organisations carrying out work for a public sector employer. This is because of what is called the ‘public sector equality duty’ where these employers have a legal duty to prevent and eliminate discrimination." ACAS

nathanjpj

Sncjw wrote: »

If you worked for the NHS in current employment you should have an idea of how stretched they are and how pressured departments are

So you're suggesting because the UK's biggest employer is busy, they should not make reasonable adjustments for disabled employees? That's funny.

silverwhistle

This is probably one for FBaby, but what is the definition of 'disabled' or 'disability' compared with sickness? As others have pointed out up-thread, it seems unfair to, say, have an advantage over someone with a weak chest who has sickness periods every winter.

OP, you seem very attached to your status of "disabled". I wouldn't mention the following except in the context of this thread, but I had a medical condition known as gender dysphoria. I'm a transgender woman, and part of a group that has and can suffer discrimination. Years ago via the specialist forums it appeared some in the same situation were claiming disability. Now, whilst it was a bit of a pain in the neck for a time and I needed time off for a one-off hospital visit, I never regarded it as such.

I appreciate being Bi-polar is more debilitating than being trans, but if the attitude you have shown on here is anything to go by then people pick up on it. People picked up on my status too at interview to begin with, but I kept up my (wry) smile such that it wasn't an issue. If I'd kept on introspectively thinking about it it would have been a much bigger issue.

Do what I did, and move on.

nathanjpj

This discussion went off the rails a while ago, imho.

It dissolved, in the main, into a discussion on what a disabled person's rights SHOULD BE, rather than what they ARE.

I've decided to go with the overwhelming professional advice that what happened appears to be discrimination, and that I've got a strong case to prove so. There are some strong voices here arguing it isn't, but they are not professional voices. People who agreed it is discrimination simply said so, but then didn't go on to argue their case with the voracity of those who disagreed.

Certainly, it is a contentious issue, and will likely be so for the courts (tribunal), too. I am aware of such, and have my eyes open as I progress.

Personally, I believe transgenderism can be a disability, especially at certain phases of treatment, and should be defined as such. For sure, certain prolonged symptoms caused by transgender issues can define the individual as disabled. It should be appreciated, imho, the difficulties people go through that others don't - and they have no real choice in the matter.

ohreally

nathanjpj wrote: »

There are some strong voices here arguing it isn't, but they are not professional voices.

You have no way of knowing this. I suspect there are a few who in their day job provide accountable advice.

nathanjpj

<shrug>

Well, nobody stated their qualifications or professions, so as far as I know, they ain't. Whereas the professionals I spoke to, by dint, definitely are.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

What was the point in asking the question here, if all you were going to do was ignore anything that didn't agree with what you claim already to have been told?

nicechap

I'm not condoning this type of advert but you can get a feel for what the employer sees sometimes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36340016

daytona0

nicechap wrote: »

I'm not condoning this type of advert but you can get a feel for what the employer sees sometimes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36340016

Love adverts like that. So humanistic and real. None of this jumping through hoops and getting rejected at the last minute for a reason which isn't obvious.

Do you know what is sad about adverts like that? If an alcoholic could cut up meat, be agreeable with customers, handle cash and show up for work then the employer would take them on! Same goes for someone with Bipolar, or someone with no legs. Nobody really cares what's wrong with you, as long as you can do the job and show up! That's the bottom line!

OP is picking a fight in a marginal situation. In today's society they will probably succeed, and I can't criticise the "experts" whom they have consulted (fair play to OP for admitting to exaggeration - lets hope that a "professional" who charges by the hour doesn't exaggerate either!) because they know their stuff..

I just think this is a freebie for OP. Just having a potshot at the employer and see what happens (one must appreciate that people, disabled or not, will feel discriminated against through OP's actions even if they try to paint themselves as a martyr). Also cannot rule out a manic episode, which anyone with a keen eye would notice from reading OP's posts (I note how they seemed to lack the drive to seek medical help prior to the current employer bullying, which seemed to tip them over the edge, but now seem to be beaming with confidence over this discrimination issue - Bipolar in a nutshell!).

Too many red flags with OP.

I implore OP to seek medical guidance above anything else. I do that not only because this may be a manic phase, but also because OP evidently does not respect anyone's view on here and maybe a doctor is professional enough - they are the few professionals in this world who give you FREE ADVICE.

Wouldn't pay a penny to a solicitor if I was Bipolar until I was certain I had a clear mind, free of mania, and had a clear plan of my aims. Anything else is foolish.

That is the best advice I'll dish out on this forum for a long long time. It may not be "professional" but it is humanistic and real.

FBaby

and that I've got a strong case to prove so.

That's where you are being arrogant and cocky and where you might fail. All you have at this stage is POTENTIALLY a strong case. You have no way of knowing whether you do or not, and I expect neither do the people you've spoken to because until the evidence that is available is dissected by an expert professional, you can't make any assumption on the strength of your case.

I personally think that's it's your inflated self-assurance (and therefore belief in anyone who tells you what you want to hear) that will be your downfall